Combined intervention programme reduces inappropriate prescribing in elderly patients exposed to polypharmacy in primary care. An outreach geriatric medication advisory service in residential aged care: a randomised controlled trial of case conferencing. A randomized trial of geriatric liaison intervention in elderly medical inpatients. Outcomes of a randomized controlled trial of a clinical pharmacy intervention in 52 nursing homes. Improving primary care in rural Alabama with a pharmacy initiative. Analysis of the North Carolina long-term care polypharmacy initiative: a multiple-cohort approach using propensity-score matching for both evaluation and targeting. Effects of a multicomponent intervention on functional outcomes and process of care in hospitalized older patients: a randomized controlled trial of Acute Care for Elders (ACE) in a community hospital. An endocrinologist-supported intervention aimed at providers improves diabetes management in a primary care site: improving primary care of African Americans with diabetes (IPCAAD) 7. Randomized controlled trial of anticipatory and preventive multidisciplinary team care: for complex patients in a community-based primary care setting.
To evaluate the effect of a combined or a single educational intervention on the prescribing behaviour of general practitioners (GPs). The primary endpoint was effect on inappropriate prescribing according to the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI).
                General practitioners were randomised to either (1) a combined intervention consisting of an interactive educational meeting plus feedback on participating patients' medication, (2) a single intervention with an interactive educational meeting or (3) a control group (no intervention). Elderly (>65 years) patients exposed to polypharmacy (>or=5 medications) were identified and approached for inclusion. Data on medications prescribed over a 3-month period were collected, and the GPs provided detailed information on their patients before and after the intervention. A pre- and post-MAI were scored for all medications.
                Of the 277 GPs invited to participate; 41 (14.8%) volunteered. Data were obtained from 166 patients before and after the intervention. Medication appropriateness improved in the combined intervention group but not in the single intervention group. The mean change in MAI and number of medications was -5 [95% confidence interval (CI) -7.3 to -2.6] and -1.03 (95% CI -1.7 to -0.30) in the combined intervention group compared with the group with the educational meeting only and the no intervention group.
                A combined intervention consisting of an interactive educational meeting plus recommendations given by clinical pharmacologists/pharmacists concerning specific patients can improve the appropriateness of prescribing among elderly patients exposed to polypharmacy. This study adds to the limited number of well-controlled, randomised studies on overall medication appropriateness among elderly patients in primary care. Important limitations to the study include variability in data provided by participating GPs and a low number of GPs volunteering for the study. efficient strategies are needed to provide specialist advice in nursing homes to ensure quality medical care. We describe a case conference intervention involving a multidisciplinary team of health professionals.
                to evaluate the impact of multidisciplinary case conferences on the appropriateness of medications and on patient behaviours in high-level residential aged care facilities.
                cluster-randomised controlled trial.
                ten high-level aged care facilities.
                154 residents with medication problems and/or challenging behaviours were selected for case conference by residential care staff.
                two multidisciplinary case conferences involving the resident's general practitioner, a geriatrician, a pharmacist and residential care staff were held at the nursing home for each resident.
                outcomes were assessed at baseline and 3 months. The primary outcome was the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI). The behaviour of each resident was assessed via the Nursing Home Behaviour Problem Scale.
                45 residents died before follow-up. Medication appropriateness improved in the intervention group [MAI mean change 4.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.1-6.1] compared with the control group (MAI mean change 0.4, 95% CI -0.4-1.2; P < 0.001). There was a significant reduction in the MAI for benzodiazepines (mean change control -0.38, 95% CI -1.02-0.27 versus intervention 0.73, 95% CI 0.16-1.30; P = 0.017). Resident behaviours were unchanged after the intervention and the improved medication appropriateness did not extend to other residents in the facility.
                multidisciplinary case conferences in nursing homes can improve care. Outreach specialist services can be delivered without direct patient contact and achieve improvements in prescribing. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of psychogeriatric intervention in a group of elderly medical inpatients over 75 years of age. In addition to usual care, intervention consisted of multidisciplinary joint treatment by a psychogeriatric team. The main purpose of intervention was to obtain the optimal level of physical functioning.
                In a prospective randomized trial the effect of the intervention (N = 140) compared with usual care (N = 97) was estimated for physical functioning, length of stay, and nursing home placement within 12 months of discharge.
                Substantially more patients assigned to the intervention group improved in their physical functioning, and fewer became worse. The mean length of stay was 5 days shorter for the intervention group. There were more readmissions to hospital in the usual care group (29.9%) compared with the intervention group (17.4%). Of the patients assigned to the intervention treatment, 18% were admitted to a nursing home. In the usual care group this was 27%. The effects of intervention remained statistically significant for all the outcome variables after controlling for possible confounding baseline characteristics.
                The intervention we studied had clinically relevant effects on important outcome variables. Psychiatric co-morbidity was an important risk factor for the outcome of the patients in our study. By combining elements from a psychiatric and geriatric consultation service with elements from a unit-driven service, we were able to improve health care for the elderly in our hospital in a feasible and cost-effective way. To evaluate whether a year long clinical pharmacy program involving development of professional relationships, nurse education on medication issues, and individualized medication reviews could change drug use, mortality and morbidity in nursing home residents.
                A cluster randomised controlled trial, where an intervention home was matched to three control homes, was used to examine the effect of the clinical pharmacy intervention on resident outcomes. The study involved 905 residents in 13 intervention nursing homes and 2325 residents in 39 control nursing homes in south-east Queensland and north-east New South Wales, Australia. The outcome measures were: continuous drug use data from government prescription subsidy claims, cross-sectional drug use data on prescribed and administered medications, deaths and morbidity indices (hospitalization rates, adverse events and disability indices).
                This intervention resulted in a reduction in drug use with no change in morbidity indices or survival. Differences in nursing home characteristics, as defined by cluster analysis with SUDAAN, negated intervention-related apparent significant improvements in survival. The use of benzodiazepines, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, laxatives, histamine H2-receptor antagonists and antacids was significantly reduced in the intervention group, whereas the use of digoxin and diuretics remained similar to controls. Overall, drug use in the intervention group was reduced by 14.8% relative to the controls, equivalent to an annual prescription saving of A64 dollars per resident (approximately 25 pound sterling).
                This intervention improved nursing home resident outcomes related to changes in drug use and drug-related expenditure. The continuing divergence in both drug use and survival at the end of the study suggests that the difference would have been more significant in a larger and longer study, and even more so using additional instruments specific for measuring outcomes related to changes in drug use. The effect of pharmaceutical care on the prevention, detection, and resolution of medication-related problems in high-risk patients in a rural community was studied. Adult patients who received care at clinics in a medically underserved area of Alabama and who were identified as being at high risk of medication-related adverse events were randomly assigned to a control group or an intervention group. The control group received standard medical care, and the intervention group received pharmaceutical care, including a medical record review, a medication history review, pharmacotherapeutic evaluation, and patient medication education and monitoring over a one-year period. A total of 69 patients completed the study (33 in the intervention group and 36 in the control group). The percentage of patients responding to hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and anticoagulation therapy increased significantly in the intervention group and declined in the control group. Ratings for inappropriate prescribing improved in all 10 domains evaluated in the intervention group but worsened in 5 domains in the control group. There were no significant differences between the groups at 12 months in health-related quality of life or medication misadventures. Medication compliance scores improved in the intervention group but not in the control group. Medication knowledge increased in the intervention group and decreased in the control group. Pharmaceutical care in a rural, community-based setting appeared to reduce inappropriate prescribing, enhance disease management, and improve medication compliance and knowledge without adversely affecting health-related quality of life. The high cost and undesirable consequences of polypharmacy are well-recognized problems among elderly long-term care (LTC) residents. Despite the implementation of the 1987 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, which requires pharmacist review of drug regimens in this setting, medical and drug costs for LTC residents have continued to increase.
                This study evaluates the North Carolina Long-Term Care Polypharmacy Initiative, a large-scale medication therapy management program (MTMP) that combined drug utilization review activities with drug regimen review techniques.
                This was a prospective records-based study that used a difference-in-difference model with both historical and nonintervention group controls. To ensure equivalence among subjects, propensity scoring was used to match study subjects from participating LTC facilities with comparison subjects from nonparticipating facilities. Residents with interventions were grouped for analysis by intervention type-retrospective only, prospective only, or dual type (residents with both prospective and retrospective interventions)-and by intervention stage-review, recommendation, and drug change-plus an all-inclusive "all types" grouping that aggregated groups by intervention type, for a total of 10 total cohorts.
                In the overall population of 5255 study subjects identified, a US $21.63 per member per month drug-cost savings was observed. Although only 1 of 10 cohorts had a change in the number of drug fills, substantial reductions in 2 of 5 types of drug alerts were observed in all 10 cohorts. A reduction in the relative risk for hospitalization (0.84 [95% CI, 0.71-1.00]) was observed in the cohort of residents receiving a retrospective review.
                This Initiative suggests that an MTMP can be quickly launched in a large number of LTC facility residents to produce monetary drug-cost savings and improved health outcomes. Additionally, the evaluation of this program illustrates the utility of using propensity scoring techniques to target future intervention groups in a cost-effective manner. Older persons frequently experience a decline in function following an acute medical illness and hospitalization.
                To test the hypothesis that a multicomponent intervention, called Acute Care for Elders (ACE), will improve functional outcomes and the process of care in hospitalized older patients.
                Randomized controlled trial.
                Community teaching hospital.
                A total of 1,531 community-dwelling patients, aged 70 or older, admitted for an acute medical illness between November 1994 and May 1997.
                ACE includes a specially designed environment (with, for example, carpeting and uncluttered hallways); patient-centered care, including nursing care plans for prevention of disability and rehabilitation; planning for patient discharge to home; and review of medical care to prevent iatrogenic illness.
                The main outcome was change in the number of independent activities of daily living (ADL) from 2 weeks before admission (baseline) to discharge. Secondary outcomes included resource use, implementation of orders to promote function, and patient and provider satisfaction.
                Self-reported measures of function did not differ at discharge between the intervention and usual care groups by intention-to-treat analysis. The composite outcome of ADL decline from baseline or nursing home placement was less frequent in the intervention group at discharge (34% vs 40%; P = .027) and during the year following hospitalization (P = .022). There were no significant group differences in hospital length of stay and costs, home healthcare visits, or readmissions. Nursing care plans to promote independent function were more often implemented in the intervention group (79% vs 50%; P = .001), physical therapy consults were obtained more frequently (42% vs 36%; P = .027), and restraints were applied to fewer patients (2% vs 6%; P = .001). Satisfaction with care was higher for the intervention group than the usual care group among patients, caregivers, physicians, and nurses (P < .05).
                ACE in a community hospital improved the process of care and patient and provider satisfaction without increasing hospital length of stay or costs. A lower frequency of the composite outcome ADL decline or nursing home placement may indicate potentially beneficial effects on patient outcomes. Management of diabetes is frequently suboptimal in primary care settings, where providers often fail to intensify therapy when glucose levels are high, a problem known as clinical inertia. We asked whether interventions targeting clinical inertia can improve outcomes.
                A controlled trial over a 3-year period was conducted in a municipal hospital primary care clinic in a large academic medical center. We studied all patients (4,138) with type 2 diabetes who were seen in continuity clinics by 345 internal medicine residents and were randomized to be control subjects or to receive one of three interventions. Instead of consultative advice, the interventions were hard copy computerized reminders that provided patient-specific recommendations for management at the time of each patient's visit, individual face-to-face feedback on performance for 5 min every 2 weeks, or both.
                Over an average patient follow-up of 15 months within the intervention site, improvements in and final HbA1c (A1C) with feedback + reminders (deltaA1C 0.6%, final A1C 7.46%) were significantly better than control (deltaA1C 0.2%, final A1C 7.84%, P < 0.02); changes were smaller with feedback only and reminders only (P = NS vs. control). Trends were similar but not significant with systolic blood pressure (sBP) and LDL cholesterol. Multivariable analysis showed that the feedback intervention independently facilitated attainment of American Diabetes Association goals for both A1C and sBP. Over a 2-year period, overall glycemic control improved in the intervention site but did not change in other primary care sites (final A1C 7.5 vs. 8.2%, P < 0.001).
                Feedback on performance aimed at overcoming clinical inertia and given to internal medicine resident primary care providers improves glycemic control. Partnering generalists with diabetes specialists may be important to enhance diabetes management in other primary care settings. T o examine whether quality of care (QOC) improves when nurse practitioners and pharmacists work with family physicians in community practice and focus their work on patients who are 50 years of age and older and considered to be at risk of experiencing adverse health outcomes.
                Randomized controlled trial.
                A family health network with 8 family physicians, 5 nurses, and 11 administrative personnel serving 10 000 patients in a rural area near Ottawa, Ont.
                Patients 50 years of age and older at risk of experiencing adverse health outcomes (N = 241).
                At-risk patients were randomly assigned to receive usual care from their family physicians or Anticipatory and Preventive Team Care (APTCare) from a collaborative team composed of their physicians, 1 of 3 nurse practitioners, and a pharmacist.
                Quality of care for chronic disease management (CDM) for diabetes, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
                Controlling for baseline demographic characteristics, the APTCare approach improved CDM QOC by 9.2% (P < .001) compared with traditional care. The APTCare intervention also improved preventive care by 16.5% (P < .001). We did not observe significant differences in other secondary outcome measures (intermediate clinical outcomes, quality of life [Short-Form 36 and health-related quality of life scales], functional status [instrumental activities of daily living scale] and service usage).
                Additional resources in the form of collaborative multidisciplinary care teams with intensive interventions in primary care can improve QOC for CDM in a population of older at-risk patients. The appropriateness of this intervention will depend on its cost-effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT00238836 (CONSORT).
This review highlights the paucity of research into interventions to improve outcomes for multimorbidity with the focus to date being on co-morbid conditions or multimorbidity in older patients. The limited results suggest that interventions to date have had mixed effects but have shown a tendency to improve prescribing and medication adherence, particularly if interventions can be targeted at risk factors or specific functional difficulties in people with co-morbid conditions or multimorbidity. There is a need for clear definitions of participants, consideration of appropriate outcomes, and further pragmatic studies based in primary care settings.