Medication appropriateness on an acute geriatric care unit: the impact of the removal of a clinical pharmacist

Background evidence is largely available indicating benefits to adding a pharmacist on acute care wards. The benefits of maintaining pharmacotherapeutic consultant services on a geriatric ward remain unexplored. Objectives to determine the impact of the removal of a clinical pharmacist from an acute geriatric ward on patients’ Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) scores, admission-related outcomes and drug burdens. Methods researchers consulted the archives for records of patients admitted to the geriatric care unit before and after the pharmacist’s withdrawal. The primary outcome of differential MAI scores and secondary outcomes of rehospitalisations, emergency department visits, durations of hospitalisation and differential drug count were compared pre- and post-intervention. An interrupted time series analysis regression model was used for the primary outcome. Results a total of 305 patients admitted before (n = 208) and after (n = 97) the pharmacist’s withdrawal were included in the study. The intervention had a significant impact on the primary outcome, increasing the relative differential MAI score (adjusted mean) by 9.3 points (95% confidence interval 3.9–14.6). As for the secondary outcomes, differences in admission-related outcomes were non-significant but the mean differential drug count significantly increased post-intervention from 0.02 to 1.36 (P < 0.001). Conclusion the removal of the pharmacist led to an increase in inappropriate drug prescription. Careful consideration should be given to decisions regarding the removal of the pharmacist from acute geriatric care teams.

KNOWLEDGE AND PRACTICES GOVERNING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF NASOGASTRIC TUBE FEEDING AS A TEMPORARY UNDERNUTRITION MANAGEMENT MEASURE IN ACUTE GERIATRIC CARE: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH-BASED ANALYSIS

Introduction: Nasogastric tube feeding appears underused in acute geriatric care units. The objective of this study was to identify the knowledge, practice, fears or behaviors of care givers governing implementation. Material and Methods: Multicentric qualitative research study based on interviews with geriatricians and care staff. Coding of patterns and thematic analysis of the data were used to extract key concepts tied to the objective. Results: Ten geriatricians and eleven care staff were interviewed individually and in a focus-group setting. Undernutrition was perceived as a prognosis-worsening comorbidity, not a disease. Early screening for undernutrition appeared essential, but care management and monitoring was within the remit of downstream structures. A handful of indications are reported to justify moves to start nasogastric tube feeding, often as part of adjuvant care, when real benefit is expected, when the individualized feeding plan is part of a comprehensive care plan, with the patient consciously involved and after consulting with the family. Patients' fear of complications, cognitive disorders, and uncertain life expectancy often fuel concerns of a form of unreasonable obstinacy. Finally, doctors and care staff alike think that decisions on nasogastric intubation in this patient population require a multidisciplinary-team process. Conclusion: Nasogastric tube feeding in acute geriatric care remains fraught with issues. It looks a viable option, but should be part of a comprehensive care plan, based on multidisciplinary decision-making by appropriately-trained teams, where the goals of care are the patient's comfort and quality of life.