Development and validation of PolyScan, an information technology triage tool for older adults with polypharmacy: a healthcare informatics study.

IF 1.1 Q4 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
Lisheng Liu, Rashmi Alate, Jeff Harrison
{"title":"Development and validation of PolyScan, an information technology triage tool for older adults with polypharmacy: a healthcare informatics study.","authors":"Lisheng Liu,&nbsp;Rashmi Alate,&nbsp;Jeff Harrison","doi":"10.1071/HC23034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Introduction Polypharmacy is associated with potentially inappropriate medicine prescribing and avoidable medicine-related harm. Polypharmacy should not be perceived as inherently harmful. Instead, priority should be placed on reducing inappropriate prescribing. Aim The study aimed to develop and validate PolyScan, a primary care information technology tool, to triage older adults with polypharmacy who are prescribed potentially inappropriate medicines. Methods Twenty-one indicators from a New Zealand criteria of potentially inappropriate medicines to correct for older adults with polypharmacy were developed into a set of implementable definitions. The definitions were applied as algorithmic logic statements used to interrogate hospital and emergency department records and pharmaceutical collection data to classify whether each indicator was present at an individual patient level, and then triage individuals based on the number of indicators met. Validity was evaluated by comparing PolyScan's accuracy against a manual review of healthcare records for 300 older adults. Results PolyScan was successfully implemented as a tool that can be used to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing in older adults with polypharmacy at different levels of aggregation. The tool has utility for individual practitioners delivering patient care, primary care organisations undertaking quality improvement programmes, and policymakers considering system-level interventions for medicines-related safety. During the validity assessment, PolyScan identified nine individuals (3%) with polypharmacy and indicators of potentially inappropriate medicine. Five unique indicators were detected. PolyScan achieved 100% sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. Discussion PolyScan can support clinicians, clinics, and policymakers with allocation of resources, rational medicine campaigns, and identifying individuals prescribed potentially inappropriate medicines for review.</p>","PeriodicalId":16855,"journal":{"name":"Journal of primary health care","volume":"15 3","pages":"215-223"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of primary health care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/HC23034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction Polypharmacy is associated with potentially inappropriate medicine prescribing and avoidable medicine-related harm. Polypharmacy should not be perceived as inherently harmful. Instead, priority should be placed on reducing inappropriate prescribing. Aim The study aimed to develop and validate PolyScan, a primary care information technology tool, to triage older adults with polypharmacy who are prescribed potentially inappropriate medicines. Methods Twenty-one indicators from a New Zealand criteria of potentially inappropriate medicines to correct for older adults with polypharmacy were developed into a set of implementable definitions. The definitions were applied as algorithmic logic statements used to interrogate hospital and emergency department records and pharmaceutical collection data to classify whether each indicator was present at an individual patient level, and then triage individuals based on the number of indicators met. Validity was evaluated by comparing PolyScan's accuracy against a manual review of healthcare records for 300 older adults. Results PolyScan was successfully implemented as a tool that can be used to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing in older adults with polypharmacy at different levels of aggregation. The tool has utility for individual practitioners delivering patient care, primary care organisations undertaking quality improvement programmes, and policymakers considering system-level interventions for medicines-related safety. During the validity assessment, PolyScan identified nine individuals (3%) with polypharmacy and indicators of potentially inappropriate medicine. Five unique indicators were detected. PolyScan achieved 100% sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. Discussion PolyScan can support clinicians, clinics, and policymakers with allocation of resources, rational medicine campaigns, and identifying individuals prescribed potentially inappropriate medicines for review.

PolyScan的开发和验证,这是一种用于老年人多药治疗的信息技术分诊工具:一项医疗信息学研究。
引言多药治疗与潜在的不适当药物处方和可避免的药物相关危害有关。多药治疗不应被视为具有内在危害。相反,应该优先减少不适当的处方。目的该研究旨在开发和验证初级保健信息技术工具PolyScan,以对服用可能不合适药物的老年人进行多药治疗。方法将新西兰标准中的21项指标制定为一套可实施的定义,这些指标用于纠正老年人服用多种药物可能不合适的药物。这些定义被应用为算法逻辑陈述,用于询问医院和急诊科的记录以及药物收集数据,以分类每个指标是否存在于个体患者层面,然后根据满足的指标数量对个体进行分类。通过将PolyScan的准确性与300名老年人的医疗记录的手动审查进行比较来评估有效性。结果PolyScan作为一种工具被成功实施,可用于识别不同聚集水平的老年人多药治疗中潜在的不合适处方。该工具适用于提供患者护理的个体从业者、实施质量改进计划的初级保健组织以及考虑药物相关安全系统级干预措施的决策者。在有效性评估过程中,PolyScan确定了9名个体(3%)具有多药治疗和潜在不合适药物的指标。检测到五个独特的指标。PolyScan实现了100%的敏感性、特异性以及阳性和阴性预测值。讨论PolyScan可以支持临床医生、诊所和政策制定者分配资源、开展合理的药物宣传活动,并识别处方可能不合适的个人进行审查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of primary health care
Journal of primary health care PRIMARY HEALTH CARE-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
16.70%
发文量
79
审稿时长
28 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信