MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1649382182 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v56i1.407

Facilitating the Process of Medication Re-evaluation and Withdrawal in the Long-Term Institutionalized Population: The Example of Cisapride

2003· article· en· W1649382182 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Barbara Farrell, Lorna Hughes, Ineke Neutel, Kelly Babcock

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2003
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiquePharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineIntensive care medicinePopulationAdverse effectPsychological interventionPharmacyMedical prescriptionLong-term careMedical emergencyPsychiatryNursingPharmacology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION It is well documented that many patients in long-term or complex continuing care* facilities receive medications that are considered inappropriate, are not indicated, or are not utilized optimally, and that these problems occur at a higher rate than among their counterparts living at home.1-3 The prevalence of inappropriate prescribing is reportedly as high as 40% in nursing homes.4-6 For many medications prescribed to patients living in nursing homes, the indications are often not documented, which makes it difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of drug therapy.7 The occurrence of avoidable adverse drug reactions is the most serious consequence of suboptimal medication use. Drugs identified as particularly hazardous in this population include antipsychotics, antidepressants, sedatives, digoxin, diuretics, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.8-11 It is challenging to recognize treatment-emergent symptoms as adverse effects because they may not present in the standard way in frail elderly or chronically ill patients and may be misinterpreted as part of the normal aging process. The economic burden of the cost of medications, the cost of medication administration time, and the cost (although difficult to measure) of the negative pharmacotherapeutic outcomes associated with suboptimal medication use are also of concern.12 Such concerns regarding cost often create the impetus for facilities to take on the challenge of reducing inappropriate or suboptimal medication use. Attempts to decrease inappropriate medication use and corresponding costs have been successful to varying degrees. Mechanisms include consultant pharmacists providing medication reviews, interdisciplinary medication review, face-to-face educational interventions for physicians and nurses, academic detailing, pharmacy and therapeutics committee policies on formulary management, application of criteria to identify inappropriate prescribing, and drug utilization review of specific drugs or categories of drugs.13-26 Studies examining the outcome of medication withdrawal in elderly patients have shown that a high percentage of medications can be discontinued without adverse consequences.27 The nursing home or long-term care setting is believed to be a good environment in which to attempt drug withdrawal because patients can be monitored closely for adverse drug withdrawal events.28 The SCO Health Service provides long-term care, complex continuing care, palliative care, and rehabilitation services through 3 main sites in Ottawa: Elisabeth Bruyere Health Centre, St. Vincent Hospital, and Residence St. Louis (the abbreviation SCO refers to the founding Soeurs de la charite d’Ottawa or Sisters of Charity of Ottawa). In addition to an ongoing patient-specific interdisciplinary medication review conducted every 4 months at this institution, it was decided, in 1999, to explore the possibility of a targeted medication withdrawal program. In this program a drug or group of drugs would be identified for withdrawal, and the withdrawal process would be applied to all 437 patients in the institution’s complex continuing care program at the same time, rather than waiting for individual medication reviews (during which numerous issues may have to be addressed). The first drug identified for withdrawal was cisapride. A number of patients were receiving it, it accounted for a substantial portion of the institution’s drug budget, and its potential side effects are significant. A random chart audit revealed that cisapride had usually been initiated upon insertion of a feeding tube to prevent symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or aspiration pneumonia. This article describes how a carefully planned and monitored medication withdrawal program for one drug was successful in decreasing medication use and costs in a complex continuing care facility and in identifying patients who required alternative or continued medication for their condition. This example illustrates the need for continuous re-evaluation of medication treatment in long-term institutionalized patients. The process described here is one method of ensuring that medication therapy does get re-evaluated in patients for whom pharmacists and physicians may have difficulty making medication therapy changes.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,009
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,009
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,049

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0090,024
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,002
Communication savante0,0030,003
Science ouverte0,0020,005
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0080,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,125
Tête enseignante GPT0,419
Écart entre enseignants0,294 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2003
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy→Même sujetPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes→Travaux en français237 207→