Ghent Older People’s Prescriptions Community Pharmacy Screening (GheOP3S)-Tool Version 2: Update of a Tool to Detect Drug-Related Problems in Older People in Primary Care

Abstract

Background The Ghent Older People’s Prescriptions community Pharmacy Screening (GheOP 3 S)-tool was developed in 2016 as a screening tool to detect drug-related problems (DRPs) and to help in performing medication reviews in older people (≥ 65 years). Objective This study aimed to revise and update the GheOP 3 S-tool. Methods Users’ comments were collected to improve the usability and appropriateness of the original GheOP 3 S-tool, followed by a two-round modified Delphi process according to the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method. This included a literature review, a round zero meeting, a first written round (with 15 international and multidisciplinary experts) and a second face-to-face round (with 11 experts) to change, delete or add GheOP 3 S-criteria. An additional third round with 14 community pharmacists was organised to preserve criteria applicable in the current community pharmacy practice. Results The updated GheOP 3 S-tool consists of five lists of DRPs and a new addendum containing medications that should be avoided or used with caution in older people with reduced renal function. During the first two rounds, related criteria were grouped, 14 criteria were added and 17 criteria were deleted from the original tool. All criteria were deemed applicable in round 3. This led to a final tool (version 2) with 64 GheOP 3 S-criteria. Conclusion GheOP 3 S-criteria were revised and updated according to experts’ agreement on their clinical relevance and recent scientific evidence. Future studies should investigate the impact of pharmacist-led medication reviews with GheOP 3 S-tool version 2 on clinical, humanistic and economic outcomes in primary care. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40266-021-00862-6.

Applicability of explicit potentially inappropriate medication lists to the Australian context: A systematic review

“…The majority of the included lists were for older people generally, although lists were identified specifically for older people living with dementia, 26 heart failure, 27,28 frailty 29 or in residential aged care 30,31 . Older people were defined as people aged 65 years and older for most of the lists ( n = 21), 26,31‐49 while two lists specified 70 years and older, 30,50 and one list specified 75 years and older 51 . Older people were not defined by age in the remaining papers ( n = 11) 27‐29,52‐59 …”

“…Most lists were intended for use in clinical practice; however, some studies also indicated alternative purposes, which included use as a teaching tool, decision aid, for medication reviews, quality assessments or for applying to epidemiological data (Table 1). Multiple studies were conducted in Canada ( n = 4), 31,40,53,54 United States ( n = 3), 32,44,47 Korea ( n = 3), 37‐39 Norway ( n = 2), 30,50 Spain ( n = 2), 49,55 Australia ( n = 2), 26,33 Belgium ( n = 2), 35,58 Thailand ( n = 2), 27,46 Ireland ( n = 2), 28,29 Italy ( n = 1), 60 Japan ( n = 1), 43 Taiwan ( n = 1), 34 Turkey ( n = 1), 52 Germany ( n = 1), 36 China ( n = 1), 59 France ( n = 1) 51 and Hong Kong ( n = 1) 48 . Four studies were collaborative works between multiple countries 42,45,56,57 …”

“…The outcome of the quality assessment is presented in Table 2. Twenty‐four studies had participants that were reproducible, 26,27,29‐31,33‐35,37‐41,47,48,50‐53,55,57‐60 all but one study 54 involved a multidisciplinary panel, and 27 studies included three or more professional groups or consumers 26‐38,41,43,47‐53,55‐57,59,60 26‐30,32‐46,48‐53,55‐60 .…”

Identifying Potential Drug-Related Problems Among Geriatric Patients With Use of an Integrated Clinical Decision Support Tool

“…In addition, it is crucial to investigate the ways to include additional information about the PIMs listed in both criteria in the design of the integrated PIM tool, e.g., “positive” list of active substances or medication classes (A- and B-class medications) for certain indications by EURO-FORTA, as well as suggestions for dose and/or treatment duration adjustments (also in relation to hepatic and renal function), and therapeutic alternatives for PIMs based on the EU(7)-PIM list. Lastly, the authors discuss the future option to include recommendations concerning the use of a similar alternative PIM checklist [e.g., the Ghent Older People’s Prescriptions Community Pharmacy Screening (GheOP3S)‐Tool Version 2] for identification of the grey PIMs or any other possible discrepancies ( Foubert et al, 2021 ).…”

Development and consensus testing of quality indicators for geriatric pharmacotherapy in primary care using a modified Delphi study

“…This monitoring role by community pharmacists in primary care directly aligns with a broader international trend towards the provision of professional pharmacy services, which came to prominence in the 1990s with the advent of “pharmaceutical care” [ 7 ]. Pharmaceutical care has been defined as ‘the pharmacist’s contribution to the care of individuals in order to optimise medicines use and improve health outcomes’ [ 8 ], highlighting the need for routine monitoring of the use of medicines within healthcare systems [ 9 ].…”