Development and piloting of an algorithm to select older patients for different types of medication review

Stijn Crutzen, Jan Schuling, Jacqueline G. Hugtenburg, Monique Verduijn, Martina Teichert, Katja Taxis, Petra Denig

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Aim: To develop and pilot an algorithm to select older people for different types of medication review based on their case complexity. Methods: Experts rated complexity of patient cases through a Delphi-consensus method. The case characteristics were included in a regression model predicting complexity to develop a criteria-based algorithm. The algorithm was piloted in four community pharmacies with 38 patients of high and low complexity. Pharmacists conducted medication reviews according to their personal judgment and rated the patients' complexity. Time needed for reviewing and number of interventions (proposed and implemented) were assessed. Feasibility was evaluated with in-depth interviews. Results: We developed the algorithm with 75 cases proceeding from patients in average 79 years old and using 10 prescribed medications. The regression model (adjusted R2 = 0.726, P < 0.0001) resulted in the following criteria for the algorithm: "number of medications" × 1 + "number of prescribers" × 3 + "recent fall incident" × 7 + "does not collect own medication" × 4. The pharmacists performed advanced medication reviews with all patients. The time needed to perform the medication review did not differ significantly according to case complexity (76.9 min for high complexity; 66.1 min for low complexity). Agreement between the algorithm scores and the pharmacists' ratings on complexity degree was slight to moderate (Kappa 0.16-0.42). The pharmacists had mixed opinions about the feasibility of applying the algorithm, particularly regarding the criterion "fall incidents." Conclusion: We developed an algorithm with four criteria that distinguished between high and low complexity patients as rated by experts. Additional validation steps are needed before implementation.
Original languageEnglish
Article number217
JournalFrontiers in Pharmacology
Volume10
Issue numberMAR
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Cite this

Crutzen, Stijn ; Schuling, Jan ; Hugtenburg, Jacqueline G. ; Verduijn, Monique ; Teichert, Martina ; Taxis, Katja ; Denig, Petra. / Development and piloting of an algorithm to select older patients for different types of medication review. In: Frontiers in Pharmacology. 2019 ; Vol. 10, No. MAR.
@article{b1be2aa7fdad44e785907a999bc09310,
title = "Development and piloting of an algorithm to select older patients for different types of medication review",
abstract = "Aim: To develop and pilot an algorithm to select older people for different types of medication review based on their case complexity. Methods: Experts rated complexity of patient cases through a Delphi-consensus method. The case characteristics were included in a regression model predicting complexity to develop a criteria-based algorithm. The algorithm was piloted in four community pharmacies with 38 patients of high and low complexity. Pharmacists conducted medication reviews according to their personal judgment and rated the patients' complexity. Time needed for reviewing and number of interventions (proposed and implemented) were assessed. Feasibility was evaluated with in-depth interviews. Results: We developed the algorithm with 75 cases proceeding from patients in average 79 years old and using 10 prescribed medications. The regression model (adjusted R2 = 0.726, P < 0.0001) resulted in the following criteria for the algorithm: {"}number of medications{"} × 1 + {"}number of prescribers{"} × 3 + {"}recent fall incident{"} × 7 + {"}does not collect own medication{"} × 4. The pharmacists performed advanced medication reviews with all patients. The time needed to perform the medication review did not differ significantly according to case complexity (76.9 min for high complexity; 66.1 min for low complexity). Agreement between the algorithm scores and the pharmacists' ratings on complexity degree was slight to moderate (Kappa 0.16-0.42). The pharmacists had mixed opinions about the feasibility of applying the algorithm, particularly regarding the criterion {"}fall incidents.{"} Conclusion: We developed an algorithm with four criteria that distinguished between high and low complexity patients as rated by experts. Additional validation steps are needed before implementation.",
keywords = "medication reviews, polypharmacy, patient selection, aged, primary care",
author = "Stijn Crutzen and Jan Schuling and Hugtenburg, {Jacqueline G.} and Monique Verduijn and Martina Teichert and Katja Taxis and Petra Denig",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.3389/fphar.2019.00217",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
journal = "Frontiers in Pharmacology",
issn = "1663-9812",
publisher = "Frontiers Media S.A.",
number = "MAR",

}

Development and piloting of an algorithm to select older patients for different types of medication review. / Crutzen, Stijn; Schuling, Jan; Hugtenburg, Jacqueline G.; Verduijn, Monique; Teichert, Martina; Taxis, Katja; Denig, Petra.

In: Frontiers in Pharmacology, Vol. 10, No. MAR, 217, 2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Development and piloting of an algorithm to select older patients for different types of medication review

AU - Crutzen, Stijn

AU - Schuling, Jan

AU - Hugtenburg, Jacqueline G.

AU - Verduijn, Monique

AU - Teichert, Martina

AU - Taxis, Katja

AU - Denig, Petra

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Aim: To develop and pilot an algorithm to select older people for different types of medication review based on their case complexity. Methods: Experts rated complexity of patient cases through a Delphi-consensus method. The case characteristics were included in a regression model predicting complexity to develop a criteria-based algorithm. The algorithm was piloted in four community pharmacies with 38 patients of high and low complexity. Pharmacists conducted medication reviews according to their personal judgment and rated the patients' complexity. Time needed for reviewing and number of interventions (proposed and implemented) were assessed. Feasibility was evaluated with in-depth interviews. Results: We developed the algorithm with 75 cases proceeding from patients in average 79 years old and using 10 prescribed medications. The regression model (adjusted R2 = 0.726, P < 0.0001) resulted in the following criteria for the algorithm: "number of medications" × 1 + "number of prescribers" × 3 + "recent fall incident" × 7 + "does not collect own medication" × 4. The pharmacists performed advanced medication reviews with all patients. The time needed to perform the medication review did not differ significantly according to case complexity (76.9 min for high complexity; 66.1 min for low complexity). Agreement between the algorithm scores and the pharmacists' ratings on complexity degree was slight to moderate (Kappa 0.16-0.42). The pharmacists had mixed opinions about the feasibility of applying the algorithm, particularly regarding the criterion "fall incidents." Conclusion: We developed an algorithm with four criteria that distinguished between high and low complexity patients as rated by experts. Additional validation steps are needed before implementation.

AB - Aim: To develop and pilot an algorithm to select older people for different types of medication review based on their case complexity. Methods: Experts rated complexity of patient cases through a Delphi-consensus method. The case characteristics were included in a regression model predicting complexity to develop a criteria-based algorithm. The algorithm was piloted in four community pharmacies with 38 patients of high and low complexity. Pharmacists conducted medication reviews according to their personal judgment and rated the patients' complexity. Time needed for reviewing and number of interventions (proposed and implemented) were assessed. Feasibility was evaluated with in-depth interviews. Results: We developed the algorithm with 75 cases proceeding from patients in average 79 years old and using 10 prescribed medications. The regression model (adjusted R2 = 0.726, P < 0.0001) resulted in the following criteria for the algorithm: "number of medications" × 1 + "number of prescribers" × 3 + "recent fall incident" × 7 + "does not collect own medication" × 4. The pharmacists performed advanced medication reviews with all patients. The time needed to perform the medication review did not differ significantly according to case complexity (76.9 min for high complexity; 66.1 min for low complexity). Agreement between the algorithm scores and the pharmacists' ratings on complexity degree was slight to moderate (Kappa 0.16-0.42). The pharmacists had mixed opinions about the feasibility of applying the algorithm, particularly regarding the criterion "fall incidents." Conclusion: We developed an algorithm with four criteria that distinguished between high and low complexity patients as rated by experts. Additional validation steps are needed before implementation.

KW - medication reviews

KW - polypharmacy

KW - patient selection

KW - aged

KW - primary care

UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85066612854&origin=inward

UR - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30941034

U2 - 10.3389/fphar.2019.00217

DO - 10.3389/fphar.2019.00217

M3 - Article

VL - 10

JO - Frontiers in Pharmacology

JF - Frontiers in Pharmacology

SN - 1663-9812

IS - MAR

M1 - 217

ER -