在专科姑息治疗环境中,药剂师主导的癌症患者处方干预。

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Ciarán McAdam, Eimear O'Dwyer, Kieran Dalton
{"title":"在专科姑息治疗环境中,药剂师主导的癌症患者处方干预。","authors":"Ciarán McAdam, Eimear O'Dwyer, Kieran Dalton","doi":"10.1007/s00520-025-09341-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) among adult cancer patients in palliative care, the rate at which physicians implemented pharmacists' deprescribing recommendations, and some cost implications of deprescribing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medication reconciliation was performed for each eligible patient, with both the OncPal deprescribing guideline and clinical judgement applied to identify PIMs. PIM prevalence was evaluated for each medication class. The physician recommendation implementation rate and medication cost savings were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the 48 included patients, 25.2% of medications were PIMs (mean 2.4/patient) - with 86.7% OncPal-defined PIMs, most commonly vitamins, medications for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD), and lipid-modifying agents. Pharmacist deprescribing recommendations were implemented 71.7% of the time, equivalent to 1.7 fewer medications per patient. The 28-day cost was €948.27 for deprescribed PIMs. Implementation rates varied based on patient admission type, with a significantly higher (p<0.05) rate in those admitted for end-of-life care (83.3%) versus symptom control (65.1%) and respite (30%) admissions. Recommendations to deprescribe GORD medications had a significantly lower rate of implementation (26.7%) compared to all other medications (p<0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study underscores the benefits of pharmacist-led deprescribing in inpatient palliative care, resulting in cost savings and reduced medication burden. There is a notable need for proactive deprescribing before reaching inpatient care. Different deprescribing rates across medication types highlight the significance of reviewing medications which may have a role in symptom management. The omission of some medications from OncPal emphasises the importance in refining future deprescribing guidelines in palliative care.</p>","PeriodicalId":22046,"journal":{"name":"Supportive Care in Cancer","volume":"33 4","pages":"321"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11946936/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pharmacist-led deprescribing interventions for cancer patients in a specialist palliative care setting.\",\"authors\":\"Ciarán McAdam, Eimear O'Dwyer, Kieran Dalton\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00520-025-09341-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) among adult cancer patients in palliative care, the rate at which physicians implemented pharmacists' deprescribing recommendations, and some cost implications of deprescribing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medication reconciliation was performed for each eligible patient, with both the OncPal deprescribing guideline and clinical judgement applied to identify PIMs. PIM prevalence was evaluated for each medication class. The physician recommendation implementation rate and medication cost savings were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the 48 included patients, 25.2% of medications were PIMs (mean 2.4/patient) - with 86.7% OncPal-defined PIMs, most commonly vitamins, medications for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD), and lipid-modifying agents. Pharmacist deprescribing recommendations were implemented 71.7% of the time, equivalent to 1.7 fewer medications per patient. The 28-day cost was €948.27 for deprescribed PIMs. Implementation rates varied based on patient admission type, with a significantly higher (p<0.05) rate in those admitted for end-of-life care (83.3%) versus symptom control (65.1%) and respite (30%) admissions. Recommendations to deprescribe GORD medications had a significantly lower rate of implementation (26.7%) compared to all other medications (p<0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study underscores the benefits of pharmacist-led deprescribing in inpatient palliative care, resulting in cost savings and reduced medication burden. There is a notable need for proactive deprescribing before reaching inpatient care. Different deprescribing rates across medication types highlight the significance of reviewing medications which may have a role in symptom management. The omission of some medications from OncPal emphasises the importance in refining future deprescribing guidelines in palliative care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22046,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Supportive Care in Cancer\",\"volume\":\"33 4\",\"pages\":\"321\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11946936/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Supportive Care in Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-025-09341-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Supportive Care in Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-025-09341-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在确定姑息治疗成年癌症患者中潜在不适当药物(PIMs)的患病率,医生实施药剂师处方减少建议的比率,以及处方减少的一些成本影响。方法:对每位符合条件的患者进行药物调节,同时采用OncPal处方指南和临床判断来识别pim。评估每个药物类别的PIM患病率。计算医师建议执行率和节省的用药费用。结果:在48例纳入的患者中,25.2%的药物为pim(平均2.4例/例),其中86.7%为oncpal定义的pim,最常见的是维生素、胃食管反流病(GORD)药物和脂质调节剂。71.7%的时间执行了药剂师的处方推荐,相当于每位患者减少了1.7种药物。指定pim的28天费用为948.27欧元。结论:本研究强调了在姑息治疗中由药剂师主导的开处方的好处,可以节省成本,减轻用药负担。值得注意的是,在达到住院治疗之前,需要主动开处方。不同药物类型的不同处方率突出了回顾可能在症状管理中起作用的药物的重要性。OncPal遗漏了一些药物,这强调了在缓和治疗中完善未来处方指南的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pharmacist-led deprescribing interventions for cancer patients in a specialist palliative care setting.

Purpose: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) among adult cancer patients in palliative care, the rate at which physicians implemented pharmacists' deprescribing recommendations, and some cost implications of deprescribing.

Methods: Medication reconciliation was performed for each eligible patient, with both the OncPal deprescribing guideline and clinical judgement applied to identify PIMs. PIM prevalence was evaluated for each medication class. The physician recommendation implementation rate and medication cost savings were calculated.

Results: In the 48 included patients, 25.2% of medications were PIMs (mean 2.4/patient) - with 86.7% OncPal-defined PIMs, most commonly vitamins, medications for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD), and lipid-modifying agents. Pharmacist deprescribing recommendations were implemented 71.7% of the time, equivalent to 1.7 fewer medications per patient. The 28-day cost was €948.27 for deprescribed PIMs. Implementation rates varied based on patient admission type, with a significantly higher (p<0.05) rate in those admitted for end-of-life care (83.3%) versus symptom control (65.1%) and respite (30%) admissions. Recommendations to deprescribe GORD medications had a significantly lower rate of implementation (26.7%) compared to all other medications (p<0.0001).

Conclusion: This study underscores the benefits of pharmacist-led deprescribing in inpatient palliative care, resulting in cost savings and reduced medication burden. There is a notable need for proactive deprescribing before reaching inpatient care. Different deprescribing rates across medication types highlight the significance of reviewing medications which may have a role in symptom management. The omission of some medications from OncPal emphasises the importance in refining future deprescribing guidelines in palliative care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Supportive Care in Cancer
Supportive Care in Cancer 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
9.70%
发文量
751
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Supportive Care in Cancer provides members of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) and all other interested individuals, groups and institutions with the most recent scientific and social information on all aspects of supportive care in cancer patients. It covers primarily medical, technical and surgical topics concerning supportive therapy and care which may supplement or substitute basic cancer treatment at all stages of the disease. Nursing, rehabilitative, psychosocial and spiritual issues of support are also included.
×
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