Integrating pharmacists into aged care facilities to improve the quality use of medicine (PiRACF Study): protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Models for delivery and co-ordination of primary or secondary health care (or both) to older adults living in aged care facilities

BACKGROUND

The number of older people is increasing worldwide and public expenditure on residential aged care facilities (ACFs) is expected to at least double, and possibly triple, by 2050. Co-ordinated and timely care in residential ACFs that reduces unnecessary hospital transfers may improve residents' health outcomes and increase satisfaction with care among ACF residents, their families and staff. These benefits may outweigh the resources needed to sustain the changes in care delivery and potentially lead to cost savings. Our systematic review comprehensively and systematically presents the available evidence of the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of alternative models of providing health care to ACF residents.

OBJECTIVES

Main objective To assess the effectiveness and safety of alternative models of delivering primary or secondary health care (or both) to older adults living in ACFs. Secondary objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of the alternative models.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and two trials registers (WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov) on 26 October 2022, together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included individual and cluster-randomised trials, and cost/cost-effectiveness data collected alongside eligible effectiveness studies. Eligible study participants included older people who reside in an ACF as their place of permanent abode and healthcare professionals delivering or co-ordinating the delivery of healthcare at ACFs. Eligible interventions focused on either ways of delivering primary or secondary health care (or both) or ways of co-ordinating the delivery of this care. Eligible comparators included usual care or another model of care. Primary outcomes were emergency department visits, unplanned hospital admissions and adverse effects (defined as infections, falls and pressure ulcers). Secondary outcomes included adherence to clinical guideline-recommended care, health-related quality of life of residents, mortality, resource use, access to primary or specialist healthcare services, any hospital admissions, length of hospital stay, satisfaction with the health care by residents and their families, work-related satisfaction and work-related stress of ACF staff.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence using GRADE. The primary comparison was any alternative model of care versus usual care.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 40 randomised trials (21,787 participants; three studies only reported number of beds) in this review. Included trials evaluated alternative models of care aimed at either all residents of the ACF (i.e. no specific health condition; 11 studies), ACF residents with mental health conditions or behavioural problems (12 studies), ACF residents with a specific condition (e.g. residents with pressure ulcers, 13 studies) or residents requiring a specific type of care (e.g. residents after hospital discharge, four studies). Most alternative models of care focused on 'co-ordination of care' (n = 31). Three alternative models of care focused on 'who provides care' and two focused on 'where care is provided' (i.e. care provided within ACF versus outside of ACF). Four models focused on the use of information and communication technology. Usual care, the comparator in all studies, was highly heterogeneous across studies and, in most cases, was poorly reported. Most of the included trials were susceptible to some form of bias; in particular, performance (89%), reporting (66%) and detection (42%) bias. Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may make little or no difference to the proportion of residents with at least one emergency department visit (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.20; 7 trials, 1276 participants; low-certainty evidence), but may reduce the proportion of residents with at least one unplanned hospital admission (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.99, I2 = 53%; 8 trials, 1263 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of alternative models of care on adverse events (proportion of residents with a fall: RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.60, I² = 74%; 3 trials, 1061 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and adherence to guideline-recommended care (proportion of residents receiving adequate antidepressant medication: RR 5.29, 95% CI 1.08 to 26.00; 1 study, 65 participants) as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may have little or no effect on the health-related quality of life of ACF residents (MD -0.016, 95% CI -0.036 to 0.004; I² = 23%; 12 studies, 4016 participants; low-certainty evidence) and probably make little or no difference to the number of deaths in residents of ACFs (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.16, 24 trials, 3881 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). We did not pool the cost-effectiveness or cost data as the specific costs associated with the various alternative models of care were incomparable, both across models of care as well as across settings. Based on the findings of five economic evaluations (all interventions focused on co-ordination of care), we are uncertain of the cost-effectiveness of alternative models of care compared to usual care as the certainty of the evidence is very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may make little or no difference to the number of emergency department visits but may reduce unplanned hospital admissions. We are uncertain of the effect of alternative care models on adverse events (i.e. falls, pressure ulcers, infections) and adherence to guidelines compared to usual care, as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Alternative models of care may have little or no effect on health-related quality of life and probably have no effect on mortality of ACF residents compared to usual care. Importantly, we are uncertain of the cost-effectiveness of alternative models of care due to the limited, disparate data available.

Assessing implementation fidelity of an on-site pharmacist intervention within Australian residential aged care facilities: A mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

An on-site pharmacist (OSP) intervention was implemented which sought to improve medication management within residential aged care facilities (RACFs) in the Australian Capital Territory, Australia. The objectives of this mixed methods study were to evaluate the implementation fidelity of the OSP intervention and to determine the moderating factors which influenced delivery of this intervention.

METHODS

This convergent parallel mixed methods study was underpinned by Hasson's conceptual framework for implementation fidelity. Implementation fidelity for seven intervention RACFs was quantitatively assessed using three quantitative data sets: (1) range of OSP intervention activities delivered; (2) random sample of 10% of medication reviews assessed for quality; (3) proportion of residents who received at least one medication review. Semi-structured interviews (n = 14) with managers and OSPs across the intervention RACFs were conducted to identify moderating factors which may have influenced OSP intervention delivery.

RESULTS

The OSP intervention was generally delivered as intended with overall medium levels of implementation fidelity. This delivery was supported by a range of facilitation strategies with most participants perceiving that the intervention was delivered to a high standard. RACF managers and OSPs were mostly well engaged and responsive. A number of potential barriers (including the part-time OSP role, COVID-19 pandemic, RACFs spread out over a large area with significant distance between resident dwellings) and facilitators (including the pharmacist support meetings, OSPs who took time to establish relationships, RACF managers who actively supported OSPs and worked with them) for OSP intervention delivery were identified which have potential implications for the roll out of OSPs within Australian RACFs.

CONCLUSION

In this study, the implementation fidelity of OSP intervention delivery was assessed with overall medium levels of fidelity found across the intervention RACFs. This suggested that the OSP intervention can generally be delivered as intended in real world RACFs. OSP intervention delivery was influenced by a range of moderating factors, some of which posed barriers and others which facilitated the OSP intervention being delivered as intended.

Impact of on-site pharmacists in residential aged care facilities on the quality of medicines use: a cluster randomised controlled trial (PiRACF study)

Residents of residential aged care facilities (RACFs) have a high prevalence of use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and resultant medicines-related harm. This study investigated the effect of an on-site pharmacist model on PIMs use and other medication outcomes for residents in RACFs. A multi-facility, non-blind, cluster randomised controlled trial, with randomisation at the facility level, was conducted. Fifteen facilities enrolled and participated in the study, 7 facilities (560 residents) were allocated to the intervention arm and 8 facilities (737 residents) were allocated to the control arm. Each facility in the intervention arm employed an on-site pharmacist for 12 months to perform medication management activities as part of an interdisciplinary care team. The primary outcome was the proportion of residents taking at least one PIM according to the 2019 Beers® Criteria. Using generalised linear mixed-effects models, accounting for confounders and clustering, there was a significant reduction in the proportion of residents prescribed at least one PIM (odds ratio 0.50, 95% confidence interval, 0.335-0.750; p = 0.001) in the intervention arm. There were also significant decreases in the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden scale and chlorpromazine equivalent daily dose of antipsychotics. The on-site pharmacist intervention significantly improved the appropriateness of medicines use in RACFs.

Interprofessional collaboration between prescribers, managers, nursing staff and on-site pharmacists within residential aged care facilities: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

A new on-site pharmacist (OSP) intervention within residential aged care facilities (RACFs) is being investigated to help improve medication management. Interprofessional collaboration amongst prescribers, nursing staff and pharmacists is critical to improving RACF medication management.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the extent of interprofessional collaboration and the nature of the working relationships between OSPs and prescribers, managers and nursing staff.

METHODS

A mixed-methods study was undertaken within the context of a 12-month cluster randomised controlled trial. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with data analysed using framework analysis, and a survey based upon the Physician-Pharmacist Collaboration Index (PPCI) was distributed at two time points (T1 at 3 months and T2 at 9 months after OSP commencement) across seven intervention RACFs.

RESULTS

The qualitative data (n = 33 interviews) findings related to the processes supportive of these relationships e.g. on-site proximity, OSP personality and perceived (or beneficial) benefits of OSPs working with health care team members (such as OSPs being trusted and providing reassurance to RACF health care team members). The PPCI survey mean scores at T1 (n = 33) and T2 (n = 19) suggested that OSPs were able to establish positive working relationships at 3 months and that positive relationships also existed at 9 months. The integrated findings suggested that the working relationships between OSPs and health care team members were generally positive.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to explore interprofessional collaboration between OSPs and health-care team members in RACFs. The findings suggest that OSPs can positively contribute to interprofessional collaborative care within RACFs.

The role of on-site pharmacist in residential aged care facilities: findings from the PiRACF study

BACKGROUND

Residents in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) have a high number of medication-related problems. Integrating on-site pharmacists (OSPs) into this setting is a possible solution and is currently gaining traction in Australia and internationally. The Pharmacists in Residential Aged Care Facilities (PiRACF) cluster-randomised controlled trial integrated pharmacists into the RACF care team to improve medication management. The aim of this descriptive observational study is to explore the activities of OSPs when they are integrated into multidisciplinary care team in RACFs.

METHOD

An online survey tool was developed to record the activities of OSPs in RACFs using the Qualtrics© software. OSPs were asked questions about their activities in RACFs under categories that included description, time spent, outcomes where applicable and who the pharmacists communicated with to undertake the activity.

RESULTS

Six pharmacists were integrated into 7 RACFs. Overall, they recorded 4252 activities over 12 months. OSPs conducted 1022 (24.0%) clinical medication reviews; 48.8% of medication reviews identified and discussed potentially inappropriate medications with prescribers and 1025 other recommendations were made to prescribers. Overall, the prescriber accepted 51.5% of all recommendations made by OSPs. The most frequently accepted outcome was deprescribing of medications (47.5% for potentially inappropriate medications and 55.5% for other recommendations). OSPs performed facility-level activities including staff education (13.4%), clinical audits (5.8%), and quality improvement activities (9.4%). OSPs spent a large proportion of their time communicating (23.4%) extensively with prescribers, RACF's healthcare team, and residents.

CONCLUSION

OSPs successfully performed a wide range of clinical activities aimed both at improving residents' medication regimens, and organisational-level quality improvement. The OSP model presents an opportunity for pharmacists to enhance medication management in the residential aged care setting. Trial registration The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) (ACTRN: ACTRN12620000430932) on April 1, 2020.

Exploring Australian pharmacists' perceptions and practices towards reducing the risk of medicines-related harm in aged care residents

Background: Older people living in residential aged care facilities frequently experience medicines-related harm. Evidence regarding the perception and practices towards reducing these harms may facilitate the development of customised educational programs for pharmacists providing services in RACFs. Objective: To explore Australian pharmacists' opinions and practices towards reducing the risk of medicines-related harm in aged care residents. Methods: An online survey was developed based on a literature review, expert opinion, and feedback from pharmacists providing services in RACFs. A web link for the survey was shared via professional pharmacy organisations and social media groups with Australian pharmacists providing services in RACFs. Results: A total of 209 pharmacists participated in the survey. Of these, 76% (n = 158) were residential medication management review embedded pharmacists, and 24% (n = 51) were supply pharmacists for RACFs. Most pharmacists believed that medicines-related harm is common in residents (n = 174, 83%), yet few agreed that pharmacists have enough time to participate in medicines-related harm reduction services (n = 60, 28%). There was a high level of agreement regarding the key risk factors (e.g., inappropriate medicines, anticholinergic drug use, and transitions of care) and potential strategies (e.g., embedded pharmacists in RACFs, educating aged care staff, and collaborative pharmacist-led medication reviews) for reducing medicines-related harm in residents. Conclusion: Pharmacists agreed that older residents often experience medicines-related harm, but they did not frequently participate in medicines-related harm reduction services. Initiatives to engage pharmacists in team-based harm reduction services and educate aged care staff regarding safe medication management may improve residents' safety and health outcomes.

Quality Use of Medicines Indicators and Associated Factors in Residential Aged Care Facilities: Baseline Findings from the Pharmacists in RACF Study in Australia

Prescribing potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), including antipsychotics and benzodiazepines, has been used as an indicator of the quality use of medicines in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). PIMs are associated with an increased risk of falls and hospitalisations in the elderly. The purpose of this study is to assess the extent of prescribing of PIMs in RACFs at baseline in the Pharmacists in residential aged care facilities (PiRACF) study and examine the association of resident and system factors with the number of PIMs. A cross-sectional analysis of 1368 participants from 15 Australian RACFs was performed to detect PIMs using the American Geriatrics Society 2019 Beers® criteria. Most residents (68.1%) were taking at least one regular PIM; 16.9% were taking regular antipsychotics and 11.1% were taking regular benzodiazepines. Long-term proton pump inhibitors were the most frequent class of PIMs. History of falls and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index were associated with an increased number of prescribed PIMs, while dementia diagnosis and older age (85 years or more) were associated with decreased number of PIMs (p-value <0.05). Residents in facilities with lower nurse-to-resident ratios were more likely to have an increased number of PIMs (p value = 0.001). This study indicates that potentially inappropriate prescribing is common in RACFs and interventions to target residents at highest risk are needed.

Medicines use before and after comprehensive medicines review among residents of long-term care facilities: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Residential Medication Management Review (RMMR) is a subsidized comprehensive medicines review program for individuals in Australian residential aged care facilities (RACFs). This study examined weekly trends in medicines use in the four months before and after an RMMR and among a comparison group of residents who did not receive an RMMR.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included individuals aged 65 to 105 years who first entered permanent care between 1/1/2012 and 31/12/2016 in South Australia, Victoria, or New South Wales, and were taking at least one medicine. Individuals with an RMMR within 12 months of RACF entry were classified into one of three groups: (i) RMMR within 0 to 3 months, (ii) 3 to 6 months, or (iii) within 6 to 12 months of RACF entry. Individuals without RMMRs were included in the comparison group. Weekly trends in the number of defined daily doses per 1000 days were determined in the four months before and after the RMMR (or assigned index date in the comparison group) for 14 medicine classes.

Results

113909 individuals from 1979 RACFs were included, of whom 55021 received an RMMR. Across all three periods examined, decreased use of statins and proton pump inhibitors was observed post-RMMR in comparison to those without RMMRs. Decreases in calcium channel blockers, benzodiazepines/zopiclone, and antidepressants were observed following RMMR provision in the 3–6 and 6–12 months after RACF entry. Negligible changes in antipsychotic use were also observed following an RMMR in the 6–12 months after RACF entry by comparison to those without RMMRs. No changes in use of opioids, ACE inhibitors/sartans, beta blockers, loop diuretics, oral anticoagulants, or medicines for osteoporosis, diabetes or the cognitive symptoms of dementia were observed post-RMMR.

Conclusions

For six of the 14 medicine classes investigated, modest changes in weekly trends in use were observed after the provision of an RMMR in the 6–12 months after RACF entry compared to those without RMMRs. Findings suggest that activities such as medicines reconciliation may be prioritized when an RMMR is provided on RACF entry, with deprescribing more likely after an RMMR the longer a resident has been in the RACF.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-022-03187-0.

How Do Pharmacists Practice in Aged Care? A Narrative Review of Models from Australia, England, and the United States of America

Medication management in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) is complex and often sub-optimal. Pharmacist practice models and services have emerged internationally to address medication-related issues in RACFs. This narrative review aimed to explore pharmacist practice models in aged care in Australia, England and the USA, and identify key activities and characteristics within each model. A search strategy using key terms was performed in peer-reviewed databases, as well as the grey literature. Additionally, experts from the selected countries were consulted to obtain further information about the practice models in their respective countries. Thirty-six documents met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Four major pharmacist practice models were identified and formed the focus of the review: (1) the NHS’s Medicine Optimisation in Care Homes (MOCH) program from England; (2) the Australian model utilising visiting accredited pharmacists; (3) the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) pharmacy services in long-term care from the USA; and (4) the Medication Therapy Management (MTM) program from the USA. Medication reviews were key activities in all models, but each had distinct characteristics in relation to the comprehensiveness, who is eligible, and how frequently residents receive medication review activity. There was heterogeneity in the types of facility-level activities offered by pharmacists, and further research is needed to determine the effectiveness of these activities in improving quality use of medicines in the aged care setting. This review found that in some models, pharmacists have a limited level of collaboration with other healthcare professionals, emphasising the need to trial innovative models with integrated services and increased collaboration to achieve a holistic patient-centred approach to medication management.