MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record 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 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Barbara Farrell, Lorna Hughes, Ineke Neutel, Kelly Babcock

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicinePopulationAdverse effectPsychological interventionPharmacyMedical prescriptionLong-term careMedical emergencyPsychiatryNursingPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from 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.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.125
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy→Same topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes→French-language works237,207→