Muriel Burk

Potentially inappropriate prescribing in elderly veterans: Are we using the wrong drug, wrong dose, or wrong duration?

Objectives: To identify the extent of inappropriate prescribing using criteria for proper use developed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and dose‐limitation criteria defined by Beers, as well as to describe duration of use and patient characteristics associated with inappropriate prescribing for older people.

Potentially inappropriate prescribing for the elderly: Effects of geriatric care at the patient and health care system level

Background:Many studies have identified patient characteristics associated with potentially inappropriate prescribing in the elderly (PIPE), however, little attention has been directed toward how health care system factors such as geriatric care may affect this patient safety issue. Objective:This study examines the association between geriatric care and PIPE in a community dwelling elderly population. Research Design:Cross-sectional retrospective database study. Subjects:Veterans age ≥65 years who received health care in the VA system during Fiscal Years (FY99-00), and also received at medications from the Veterans Administration in FY00. Measures:PIPE was identified using the Zhan adaptation of the Beers criteria. Geriatric care penetration was calculated as the proportion of patients within a facility who received at least 1 geriatric outpatient clinic or inpatient visit. Analyses:Logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations were used to assess the relationship between geriatric care and PIPE after controlling for patient and health care system characteristics. Results:Patients receiving geriatric care were less likely to have PIPE exposure (odds ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.59–0.73). There was also a weak effect for geriatric care penetration, with a trend for patients in low geriatric care penetration facilities having higher risk for PIPE regardless of individual geriatric care exposure (odds ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 0.99–1.30). Conclusions:Although geriatric care is associated with a lower risk of PIPE, additional research is needed to determine if heterogeneity in the organization and delivery of geriatric care resulted in the weak effect of geriatric care penetration, or whether this is a result of low power.

Effect of increased copayments on pharmacy use in the Department of Veterans Affairs

Objectives:In February 2002, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) raised medication copayments from

Medication acquisition across systems of care and patient–provider communication among older veterans

2 to

Total duration of antimicrobial therapy in veterans hospitalized with uncomplicated pneumonia: Results of a national medication utilization evaluation

7 per 30-day supply of medication for certain veteran groups. We examined the impact of the copayment increase on medication acquisition from VA. Methods:This was a retrospective cohort study using data from national VA databases from February 2001 through February 2003. We took a random sample of over 5% of male VA users in 2001. Of 149,107 veterans sampled, 19,504 (13%) had copayments for no drugs, 101,410 (68%) had copayments for some drugs, and 28,193 (19%) had copayments for all drugs. We used multivariable count models to examine changes in the number of 30-day medication supplies after the increase. Results:After the copayment increase, veterans subject to copayments for all drugs received 8% fewer 30-day supplies of medication annually relative to veterans with no copayments (P < 0.001). The effect of the copayment increased as the number of different medications veterans received increased. Among veterans subject to copayments for all drugs, acquisition of lower-cost drugs fell by 36%, higher-cost medications fell by 6%, over-the-counter medications fell by 40%, and prescription-only medications fell by 4% relative to veterans with no drug copayments. Conclusions:The number of medications veterans obtained from VA decreased after the copayment increase. There were relatively larger impacts on veterans with higher medication use and on lower-cost and over-the-counter medications.

Pharmacy Benefits Management in the Veterans Health Administration Revisited: A Decade of Advancements, 2004-2014

PURPOSE The results of a survey assessing Medicare Part D enrollment, the use of pharmacotherapies for chronic diseases, and other medication-use issues in a population of elderly military veterans are presented. METHODS Medicare-eligible (i.e., ≥65 years of age) patients with documented recent service use at a single Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center were targeted for a mail survey. Women were oversampled (20%) to ensure an adequate sample size; the sample was weighted to adjust for this oversampling. Usable survey data were received from 458 survey respondents. RESULTS Nearly all respondents (93.2%) reported having one or more chronic conditions; of those, 93.3% reported regular use of multiple drug therapies, and 30.1% reported using medications prescribed by both VA and non-VA providers for the same chronic condition. About half of the survey respondents reported at least one office visit with a non-VA physician during the previous year, and 55.8% reported obtaining medications from non-VA pharmacies. More than half (54.1%) of the respondents reported non-VA medication coverage, with 21.2% indicating they were enrolled in Medicare Part D. Among the respondents who reported obtaining medications from non-VA pharmacies, substantial proportions reported discussing those medications with VA physicians never (38.4%) or infrequently (15.7%). CONCLUSION Although large proportions of Medicare-eligible veterans take multiple medications and use non-VA health care services and pharmacies, many do not discuss medications obtained outside the VA system with VA physicians, suggesting that increased efforts to enhance provider-patient communication and medication reconciliation across VA and non-VA systems of care may be warranted.

Topical Anesthetic-Induced Methemoglobinemia and Veterans Affairs Hospitals

OBJECTIVE Practice guidelines recommend the shortest duration of antimicrobial therapy appropriate to treat uncomplicated pneumonia be prescribed to reduce the emergence of resistant pathogens. A national evaluation was conducted to assess the duration of therapy for pneumonia. DESIGN Retrospective medication utilization evaluation. SETTING Thirty Veterans Affairs medical centers. PATIENTS Inpatients discharged with a diagnosis of pneumonia. MEASUREMENTS A manual review of electronic medical records of inpatients discharged with uncomplicated community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) or healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP) was conducted. Appropriate CAP therapy duration was defined as at least 5 days, and up to 3 additional days beginning the first day the patient achieved clinical stability criteria; the appropriate HCAP therapy duration was defined as 8 days. The duration of antimicrobial therapy for intravenous (IV) and oral (PO) inpatient administration, PO therapy dispensed upon discharge, Clostridium difficile infection (CDI), hospital readmission, and death rates were measured. RESULTS Of 3881 pneumonia admissions, 1739 met inclusion criteria (CAP [n = 1195]; HCAP [n = 544]). Overall, 13.9% of patients (CAP [6.9%], HCAP [29.0%]) received therapy duration consistent with guideline recommendations. The median (interquartile range) days of therapy were 4 days (3-6 days), 1 day (0-3 days), and 6 days (4-8 days) for inpatient IV, inpatient PO, and outpatient PO antimicrobials, respectively. CDI was rare but more common in patients who received therapy duration consistent with guidelines. Therapy duration was not associated with the readmission or mortality rate. CONCLUSIONS Antimicrobials were commonly prescribed for a longer duration than guidelines recommend. The majority of excessive therapy was completed upon discharge, identifying the need for strategies to curtail unnecessary use postdischarge. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2015;11:832-839.

Veterans' Pharmacy and Health Care Utilization Following Implementation of the Medicare Part D Pharmacy Benefit

UNLABELLED Over the past decade, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Pharmacy Benefits Management Services (PBM) has enhanced its formulary management activities and added programs to ensure that the national drug plan continues to meet the pharmacy needs of veterans and to promote safe and appropriate drug therapy in the face of rising medication expenditures. This article describes the broad range of services provided by the VA PBM that work in partnership to deliver a high-quality and sustainable pharmacy benefit for veterans. In support of formulary management, VA PBM pharmacists prepare extensive clinical guidance documents (e.g., drug monographs and criteria for use) that are used by physicians and pharmacists with operational and clinical oversight of the VA national formulary. The VA PBM has utilized various contracting techniques and continually evaluates drug utilization data to identify opportunities for potential savings. Remarkably, since before 2004, the average acquisition cost for a 1-month supply of medication has remained fairly stable at approximately

Detection of potential look-alike/sound-alike medication errors using Veterans Affairs administrative databases

13-

Medication-use evaluation with a Web application.

15. Two new VA PBM programs are the VA Center for Medication Safety (VA MedSAFE) and the Clinical Pharmacy Practice Office (CPPO). VA MedSAFE is a comprehensive pharmacovigilance program focused on the detection, assessment, and prevention of adverse drug events, and CPPO is dedicated to improving safe and appropriate medication use by supporting and expanding clinical pharmacy practice. Moving forward, the VA PBM will consider new initiatives to stay at the forefront of providing quality care while maintaining economic viability. DISCLOSURES No outside funding supported this research. This work was supported by VA Pharmacy Benefits Management Services (VA PBM), Hines, Illinois, and VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Glassman is co-director of the VA Center for Medication Safety, which is part of the VA PBM. He is also part of the Medical Advisory Panel for the VA PMB. All other authors are employed by the VA PBM. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors, and no official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs or the U.S. government is intended or should be inferred. Study concept and design were contributed by Valentino, Cunningham, Good, Aspinall, and Sales. Calabrese and Ourth took the lead in data collection, along with Good, Cunningham, Aspinall, Sales, Burk, Moore, Neuhauser, and Golterman. Data interpretation was performed by Burk, Newhauser, and Golterman, along with Glassman, Calabrese, Moore, and Ourth. The manuscript was written by Aspinall and Sales, along with Burk, Newhauser, Golterman, Ourth, and Cunningham. Good, Glassman, and Moore revised the manuscript, along with Calabrese, Valentino, and Aspinall.