MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1949629292

Improving prescribing in the elderly: a study in the long term care setting.

2001· article· en· W1949629292 on OpenAlexaffabout
S S Gill, B C Misiaszek, Christopher D. Brymer

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMedical prescriptionPharmacistGeriatricsLong-term careEmergency medicineFamily medicinePharmacyPediatricsPsychiatryNursing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence and predictors of potentially inappropriate prescribing of medications in the long term care setting, and to determine the effectiveness of follow-up pharmacist letters to the prescribing physicians in improving prescribing. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Improving Prescribing in the Elderly Tool was applied to the charts of all long term care patients aged 65 years and over at Parkwood Hospital, a rehabilitation hospital/long term care facility in London, Ontario. All potentially inappropriate prescriptions were verified by a consensus panel consisting of a family physician, a geriatric medicine specialist and a geriatric pharmacist. Follow-up letters to the prescribing physicians were developed that briefly described the concerns with the potentially inappropriate prescriptions and suggested safer alternatives. These letters were sent to the prescribing physicians, accompanied by a brief survey. Patient charts in which a potentially inappropriate prescription had been noted were reviewed for prescription changes two months after the prescribing physicians had received the follow-up letters. RESULTS: A total of 69 potentially inappropriate prescriptions were found in 65 of 355 long term care patients (18.3%). The most common types of potentially inappropriate prescriptions were anticholinergic drugs to manage antipsychotic side effects (17 cases), tricyclic antidepressants with active metabolites (16 cases), and long-acting benzodiazepines (14 cases). The total number of prescription medications (P<0.001), a history of mental illness (P=0.002) and a high minimum data set (MDS) score for depression (P=0.002) were all highly associated with potentially inappropriate prescribing. Variables that were not correlated with increased rates of potentially inappropriate prescribing included age, sex, code status, a diagnosis of dementia (as documented explicitly in the chart), high MDS scores for delirium or cognitive impairment, the date of the prescribing physician's graduation and the total Charlson comorbidity index score. Potentially inappropriate prescriptions were significantly less common in patients seen by a geriatric medicine specialist (P<0.001). In response to the follow-up letter suggesting safer alternatives, 37.9% of potentially inappropriate prescriptions were changed by the prescribing physician. Ninety-two per cent of responding physicians rated the follow-up letter as a "somewhat" or "very" helpful method for improving prescribing in elderly patients. CONCLUSIONS: Potentially inappropriate prescribing in the long term care setting is common and can be improved by the provision of a follow-up letter suggesting safer alternatives.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations35
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207