10.08.2013 Views

Geneesmiddelengebruik in de belgische rusthuizen en rust ... - KCE

Geneesmiddelengebruik in de belgische rusthuizen en rust ... - KCE

Geneesmiddelengebruik in de belgische rusthuizen en rust ... - KCE

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong><br />

Belgische <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> <strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>KCE</strong> reports vol. 47A<br />

Fe<strong>de</strong>raal K<strong>en</strong>nisc<strong>en</strong>trum voor <strong>de</strong> gezondheidszorg<br />

C<strong>en</strong>tre fédéral d expertise <strong>de</strong>s so<strong>in</strong>s <strong>de</strong> santé<br />

2006


Het Fe<strong>de</strong>raal K<strong>en</strong>nisc<strong>en</strong>trum voor <strong>de</strong> gezondheidszorg<br />

Voorstell<strong>in</strong>g : Het Fe<strong>de</strong>raal K<strong>en</strong>nisc<strong>en</strong>trum voor <strong>de</strong> gezondheidszorg is e<strong>en</strong><br />

parastatale, opgericht door <strong>de</strong> programma-wet van 24 <strong>de</strong>cember 2002<br />

(artikel<strong>en</strong> 262 tot 266) die on<strong>de</strong>r <strong>de</strong> bevoegdheid valt van <strong>de</strong> M<strong>in</strong>ister<br />

van Volksgezondheid <strong>en</strong> Sociale Zak<strong>en</strong>. Het c<strong>en</strong>trum is belast met het<br />

realiser<strong>en</strong> van beleidson<strong>de</strong>rsteun<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> studies b<strong>in</strong>n<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> sector van <strong>de</strong><br />

gezondheidszorg <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> ziekteverzeker<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Raad van Bestuur<br />

Effectieve le<strong>de</strong>n : Gillet Pierre (Voorzitter), Cuypers Dirk (On<strong>de</strong>rvoorzitter),<br />

Avontroodt Yolan<strong>de</strong>, De Cock Jo (On<strong>de</strong>rvoorzitter), De Meyere<br />

Frank, De Rid<strong>de</strong>r H<strong>en</strong>ri, Gillet Jean-Bernard, God<strong>in</strong> Jean-Noël, Goy<strong>en</strong>s<br />

Floris, Kesteloot Katri<strong>en</strong>, Maes Jef, Mert<strong>en</strong>s Pascal, Mert<strong>en</strong>s Raf,<br />

Mo<strong>en</strong>s Marc, Perl François, Smiets Pierre, Van Mass<strong>en</strong>hove Frank,<br />

Van<strong>de</strong>rmeer<strong>en</strong> Philippe, Verertbrugg<strong>en</strong> Patrick, Vermey<strong>en</strong> Karel.<br />

Plaatsvervangers : Annemans Liev<strong>en</strong>, Boon<strong>en</strong> Car<strong>in</strong>e, Coll<strong>in</strong> B<strong>en</strong>oît, Cuypers Rita, Dercq<br />

Jean-Paul, Désir Daniel, Lemye Roland, Palsterman Paul, Ponce Annick,<br />

Pirlot Viviane, Praet Jean-Clau<strong>de</strong>, Remacle Anne, Schoonjans Chris,<br />

Schroot<strong>en</strong> R<strong>en</strong>aat, Van<strong>de</strong>rstapp<strong>en</strong> Anne.<br />

Reger<strong>in</strong>gscommissaris : Roger Yves<br />

Directie<br />

Algeme<strong>en</strong> Directeur : Dirk Ramaekers<br />

Algeme<strong>en</strong> Directeur adjunct : Jean-Pierre Closon<br />

Contact<br />

Fe<strong>de</strong>raal K<strong>en</strong>nisc<strong>en</strong>trum voor <strong>de</strong> gezondheidszorg (<strong>KCE</strong>)<br />

Wetstraat 62<br />

B-1040 Brussel<br />

Belgium<br />

Tel: +32 [0]2 287 33 88<br />

Fax: +32 [0]2 287 33 85<br />

Email : <strong>in</strong>fo@k<strong>en</strong>nisc<strong>en</strong>trum.fgov.be<br />

Web : http://www.k<strong>en</strong>nisc<strong>en</strong>trum.fgov.be


<strong>G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong><br />

Belgische <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> <strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>KCE</strong> reports vol. 47A<br />

VANDER STICHELE RH, VAN DE VOORDE C, ELSEVIERS MM, VERRUE C, SOENEN K, SMET M, PETROVIC M,<br />

CHEVALIER P, DE FLOOR T, MEHUYS E, SOMERS A, GOBERT M, DE FALLEUR M, BAUWENS M,<br />

CHRISTIAENS TH, SPINEWINE A, DEVRIESE S, RAMAEKERS D<br />

Fe<strong>de</strong>raal K<strong>en</strong>nisc<strong>en</strong>trum voor <strong>de</strong> gezondheidszorg<br />

C<strong>en</strong>tre fédéral d expertise <strong>de</strong>s so<strong>in</strong>s <strong>de</strong> santé<br />

2006


<strong>KCE</strong> reports vol.47A<br />

Titel : <strong>G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> Belgische <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Auteurs : Van<strong>de</strong>r Stichele RH (UG<strong>en</strong>t), Van <strong>de</strong> Voor<strong>de</strong> C (<strong>KCE</strong>), Elseviers MM<br />

(UA), Verrue C (UG<strong>en</strong>t), So<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> K (Project Farmaka), Smet M (UA),<br />

Petrovic M (UG<strong>en</strong>t), Chevalier P (UCL), De Floor T (UG<strong>en</strong>t), Mehuys E<br />

(UG<strong>en</strong>t), Somers A (UG<strong>en</strong>t), Gobert M (UCL), De Falleur M (RIZIV),<br />

Bauw<strong>en</strong>s M (UG<strong>en</strong>t), Christia<strong>en</strong>s Th (UG<strong>en</strong>t), Sp<strong>in</strong>ew<strong>in</strong>e A (UCL),<br />

Devriese S (<strong>KCE</strong>), Ramaekers D (<strong>KCE</strong>)<br />

Externe expert<strong>en</strong> : Bogaert M (UG<strong>en</strong>t), De Gauquier K (NVSM), De Swaef A (RIZIV),<br />

Du Bois M (LCM), Sonck S (RIZIV)<br />

Externe validator<strong>en</strong> : De Lepeleire J (KULeuv<strong>en</strong>), Gemmel P (UG<strong>en</strong>t), Sw<strong>in</strong>e Ch (UCL)<br />

Conflict of <strong>in</strong>terest : J De Lepeleire heeft <strong>de</strong>elg<strong>en</strong>om<strong>en</strong> aan het on<strong>de</strong>rzoek. Hij is tev<strong>en</strong>s<br />

coörd<strong>in</strong>ator van Crataegus, het platform van CRAs <strong>in</strong> Vlaan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> heeft<br />

voor <strong>de</strong> betrokk<strong>en</strong> CRAs aanbevel<strong>in</strong>gsbriev<strong>en</strong> geschrev<strong>en</strong> om <strong>de</strong>el te<br />

nem<strong>en</strong> aan het on<strong>de</strong>rzoek.<br />

Disclaimer: De experts <strong>en</strong> validator<strong>en</strong> werkt<strong>en</strong> mee aan het wet<strong>en</strong>schappelijk rapport<br />

maar zijn niet verantwoor<strong>de</strong>lijk voor <strong>de</strong> beleidsaanbevel<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>. Deze<br />

aanbevel<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> vall<strong>en</strong> on<strong>de</strong>r <strong>de</strong> volledige verantwoor<strong>de</strong>lijkheid van het<br />

<strong>KCE</strong>.<br />

Layout: Dimitri Bogaerts<br />

Brussel, 22 januari 2007 (2 nd pr<strong>in</strong>t; 1 st pr<strong>in</strong>t, 22 <strong>de</strong>cember 2006)<br />

Studie nr 2005-17<br />

Dome<strong>in</strong> : Health Services Research (HSR)<br />

MeSH : Homes for the Aged ; Drug Utilization ; Quality Assurance, Health Care ; Health Care Costs;<br />

Health Services Research ; Pharmaceutical Services.<br />

NLM classification : WT 27<br />

Taal : Ne<strong>de</strong>rlands, Engels<br />

Format : Adobe® PDF (A4)<br />

Wettelijk <strong>de</strong>pot : D/2006/10.273/61<br />

Elke ge<strong>de</strong>eltelijke reproductie van dit docum<strong>en</strong>t is toegestaan mits bronvermeld<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Dit docum<strong>en</strong>t is beschikbaar vanop <strong>de</strong> website van het Fe<strong>de</strong>raal K<strong>en</strong>nisc<strong>en</strong>trum voor <strong>de</strong><br />

Gezondheidszorg.<br />

Hoe referer<strong>en</strong> naar dit docum<strong>en</strong>t?<br />

Van<strong>de</strong>r Stichele RH, Van <strong>de</strong> Voor<strong>de</strong> C, Elseviers M, Verrue C, So<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> K, Smet M, et al.<br />

<strong>G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> Belgische <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>. Health Services<br />

Research (HSR). Brussel: Fe<strong>de</strong>raal K<strong>en</strong>nisc<strong>en</strong>trum voor <strong>de</strong> gezondheidszorg (<strong>KCE</strong>); 2006. <strong>KCE</strong><br />

reports 47 A (D/2006/10.273/61)


Acknowledgem<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

The partners <strong>in</strong> the consortium for participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the field study:<br />

The Heymans Institute of Pharmacology, Gh<strong>en</strong>t University<br />

Departm<strong>en</strong>t of Geriatrics, Gh<strong>en</strong>t University<br />

Departm<strong>en</strong>t of Pharmaceutical Care, Gh<strong>en</strong>t University<br />

Departm<strong>en</strong>t of Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Sci<strong>en</strong>ces, Gh<strong>en</strong>t University<br />

University Hospital Pharmacy, University Cl<strong>in</strong>ic Gh<strong>en</strong>t<br />

Departm<strong>en</strong>t of G<strong>en</strong>eral Practice, Université Catholique <strong>de</strong> Louva<strong>in</strong><br />

Departm<strong>en</strong>t of Applied Economics, Antwerp University<br />

Departm<strong>en</strong>t of Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Sci<strong>en</strong>ces, Antwerp University<br />

Project Farmaka and the Work<strong>in</strong>g Group for the implem<strong>en</strong>tation of<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home drug formulary.<br />

The managem<strong>en</strong>t, head nurses, coord<strong>in</strong>at<strong>in</strong>g physicians and treat<strong>in</strong>g physicians of the participat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes for accept<strong>in</strong>g to cooperate <strong>in</strong> this study.<br />

The association of coord<strong>in</strong>at<strong>in</strong>g physicians (Crataegus) and the national managem<strong>en</strong>t associations of<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes for their support.<br />

The prov<strong>in</strong>cial coord<strong>in</strong>ators of the implem<strong>en</strong>tation of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home formulary (Dr. Jehaes, Dr.<br />

Baguet, Dr. Michiels<strong>en</strong>, Dr. Dobbeleir for their cont<strong>in</strong>uous support throughout the data collection<br />

process).<br />

The stu<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Sci<strong>en</strong>ces of the Gh<strong>en</strong>t and Antwerp University for their assistance <strong>in</strong> the data<br />

collection <strong>in</strong> the Dutch speak<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.<br />

The stu<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> Public Health of the Université Catholique <strong>de</strong> Louva<strong>in</strong> for their assistance <strong>in</strong> collect<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and <strong>en</strong>ter<strong>in</strong>g data from the Fr<strong>en</strong>ch speak<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.<br />

The Royal Society of Community Pharmacists of Eastern Flan<strong>de</strong>rs for their technical assistance <strong>in</strong> the<br />

data-<strong>en</strong>try of the medication charts.<br />

Van Camp<strong>en</strong> Jan for his technical assistance <strong>in</strong> writ<strong>in</strong>g data-<strong>en</strong>try programs, calculat<strong>in</strong>g pharmaceutical<br />

exp<strong>en</strong>ditures, classify<strong>in</strong>g medication <strong>in</strong>to <strong>in</strong>ternational classification systems and calculat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

consumption <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed daily doses.<br />

The Belgian C<strong>en</strong>tre for Pharmacotherapeutic Information for allow<strong>in</strong>g the use of their drug database<br />

<strong>in</strong> this research project.<br />

Duprez Paul<strong>in</strong>e and Katri<strong>en</strong> Cobbaert for their assistance <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>terpretation of the results on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality.<br />

De Smet-Verheecke Annie for assistance <strong>in</strong> the f<strong>in</strong>ancial managem<strong>en</strong>t of the project.<br />

Van Brabandt Hans (<strong>KCE</strong>) and Jeann<strong>in</strong>e Gailly (<strong>KCE</strong>) for participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the primary and secondary<br />

validation of the quality scores.<br />

The Intermutualistic Ag<strong>en</strong>cy and the National Institute for Health Insurance (RIZIV/INAMI) for the<br />

provision of the national data on drug utilization and <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47A G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> ROB-RVT i<br />

VOORWOORD<br />

Ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> gebruik<strong>en</strong> meer g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> dan om het ev<strong>en</strong> welke an<strong>de</strong>re leeftijdsgroep.<br />

Ze hebb<strong>en</strong> vaker langdurige, chronische ziekt<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> omdat vele ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> aan meer<strong>de</strong>re<br />

ziekt<strong>en</strong> lij<strong>de</strong>n, gebruik<strong>en</strong> ze vaak verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> tegelijkertijd. Ongeveer<br />

8% van <strong>de</strong> Belgische 65-plussers <strong>en</strong> 42% van <strong>de</strong> 85-plussers woont <strong>in</strong> e<strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- of<br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuis. De kwaliteit van <strong>de</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> die ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntiële<br />

zorg gebruik<strong>en</strong>, vormt e<strong>en</strong> belangrijke bekommernis voor het overheidsbeleid, gezi<strong>en</strong><br />

het to<strong>en</strong>em<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> aantal m<strong>en</strong>s<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> dit segm<strong>en</strong>t van <strong>de</strong> bevolk<strong>in</strong>g. De kom<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> ti<strong>en</strong> jaar<br />

zal het aantal 85-plussers <strong>in</strong> ons land stijg<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> huidige 180,000 tot 285,000.<br />

België heeft e<strong>en</strong> vrij uniek mo<strong>de</strong>l van resi<strong>de</strong>ntiële zorg voor ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>. Rust- <strong>en</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> bie<strong>de</strong>n e<strong>en</strong> thuisvervang<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> omgev<strong>in</strong>g wanneer <strong>de</strong> mogelijkhe<strong>de</strong>n<br />

<strong>in</strong>zake thuiszorg of transmurale zorg niet meer volstaan. Er won<strong>en</strong> ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> die licht tot<br />

sterk afhankelijk zijn <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>te <strong>en</strong> niet-<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>te ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> sam<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> één <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> kunn<strong>en</strong> overstapp<strong>en</strong> van het éne zorgniveau naar het an<strong>de</strong>re - van e<strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>rust</strong>huis naar e<strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuis - zon<strong>de</strong>r het gebouw te verlat<strong>en</strong>. De <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> ligg<strong>en</strong> over het hele land verspreid. Bijna elke geme<strong>en</strong>te heeft zijn<br />

eig<strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- of verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuis.<br />

Het doel van <strong>de</strong>ze studie was <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit van het g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik <strong>en</strong> van het<br />

voorschrijfgedrag <strong>in</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> te on<strong>de</strong>rzoek<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> mogelijke<br />

<strong>in</strong>vloed van organisatiek<strong>en</strong>merk<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> na te gaan. Om op <strong>de</strong>ze vrag<strong>en</strong> te<br />

antwoor<strong>de</strong>n, zijn betrouwbare gegev<strong>en</strong>s over <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> over <strong>de</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

onontbeerlijk. Als aanvull<strong>in</strong>g op <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>formatie die <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> beschikbare adm<strong>in</strong>istratieve<br />

databank<strong>en</strong>, zoals Farmanet, aanwezig was, werd e<strong>en</strong> veldstudie uitgevoerd <strong>in</strong> e<strong>en</strong><br />

selectie van <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>nt<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> prov<strong>in</strong>cies Antwerp<strong>en</strong>, Oost-Vlaan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong><br />

H<strong>en</strong>egouw<strong>en</strong>. Onze welgeme<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> dank gaat dan ook uit naar <strong>de</strong> vele <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>, hun<br />

coörd<strong>in</strong>er<strong>en</strong>d <strong>en</strong> raadgev<strong>en</strong>d arts (CRA), <strong>de</strong> vele huisarts<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> ver<strong>de</strong>r <strong>de</strong><br />

verpleegkundig<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> het verzorg<strong>en</strong>d personeel die met het nodige <strong>en</strong>thousiasme<br />

meewerkt<strong>en</strong> aan <strong>de</strong>ze studie. Dit toont op <strong>de</strong> eerste plaats het <strong>en</strong>gagem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>en</strong><br />

bekommernis van alle betrokk<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> om <strong>de</strong> zorgkwaliteit waar mogelijk te verbeter<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Dit rapport is het resultaat van e<strong>en</strong> sam<strong>en</strong>werk<strong>in</strong>g tuss<strong>en</strong> het <strong>KCE</strong>, het RIZIV <strong>en</strong> e<strong>en</strong><br />

consortium on<strong>de</strong>r leid<strong>in</strong>g van het Heymans Instituut voor Farmacologie (G<strong>en</strong>t). Het<br />

biedt aangrijp<strong>in</strong>gspunt<strong>en</strong> om <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit van het g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik <strong>in</strong> Belgische<br />

<strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> ver<strong>de</strong>r te blijv<strong>en</strong> bewak<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> te verbeter<strong>en</strong>. Dat zal e<strong>en</strong><br />

aanhou<strong>de</strong>n<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>spann<strong>in</strong>g verg<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Jean-Pierre CLOSON Dirk RAMAEKERS<br />

Adjunct algeme<strong>en</strong> directeur Algeme<strong>en</strong> directeur


ii G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> ROB-RVT <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47A<br />

INLEIDING<br />

Executive summary<br />

Op 1 januari 2005 verteg<strong>en</strong>woordig<strong>de</strong>n <strong>de</strong> 65-plussers ongeveer 17.2% van <strong>de</strong><br />

10.4 miljo<strong>en</strong> Belgische <strong>in</strong>woners, 1.6 % was ou<strong>de</strong>r dan 85. Ongeveer 8% van <strong>de</strong> 65plussers<br />

woont <strong>in</strong> e<strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>huis of e<strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuis. De kwaliteit van <strong>de</strong><br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> die ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntiële zorg gebruik<strong>en</strong>, vormt e<strong>en</strong> belangrijke<br />

bekommernis voor het overheidsbeleid, gezi<strong>en</strong> dit segm<strong>en</strong>t van <strong>de</strong> bevolk<strong>in</strong>g to<strong>en</strong>eemt<br />

<strong>en</strong> veel g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> gebruikt. Het is algeme<strong>en</strong> bek<strong>en</strong>d dat ou<strong>de</strong>re m<strong>en</strong>s<strong>en</strong> meer<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> nem<strong>en</strong> dan gelijk welke an<strong>de</strong>re leeftijdsgroep. Ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> hebb<strong>en</strong> vaker<br />

langdurige, chronische ziektes dan jongere m<strong>en</strong>s<strong>en</strong>. Omdat vel<strong>en</strong> van h<strong>en</strong> meer<strong>de</strong>re<br />

ziektes of aando<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> hebb<strong>en</strong>, nem<strong>en</strong> ze ook meer<strong>de</strong>re g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> tegelijk.<br />

In teg<strong>en</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g tot an<strong>de</strong>re lan<strong>de</strong>n bestaat er we<strong>in</strong>ig empirisch on<strong>de</strong>rzoek naar <strong>de</strong><br />

kwaliteit van het g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit van het voorschrijfgedrag <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong><br />

resi<strong>de</strong>ntiële zorg voor ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> België. Dit komt vooral door e<strong>en</strong> gebrek aan vlot<br />

toegankelijke gegev<strong>en</strong>s. Het doel van <strong>de</strong>ze studie was <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit van het<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik <strong>en</strong> van het voorschrijfgedrag <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntiële zorg voor<br />

ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> te on<strong>de</strong>rzoek<strong>en</strong> alsook <strong>de</strong> relatie met organisatiek<strong>en</strong>merk<strong>en</strong>. Deze ruime<br />

on<strong>de</strong>rzoeksvraag werd vertaald naar e<strong>en</strong> aantal meer specifieke vrag<strong>en</strong>: Wat is <strong>de</strong><br />

omvang van het g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik door ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> langdurige resi<strong>de</strong>ntiële zorg<br />

<strong>in</strong> België <strong>en</strong> welke kost<strong>en</strong> zijn eraan verbon<strong>de</strong>n? Wat zijn <strong>de</strong> medische behoeft<strong>en</strong> van<br />

geïnstitutionaliseer<strong>de</strong> ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>? Welke kwaliteits<strong>in</strong>dicator(<strong>en</strong>) moet(<strong>en</strong>) wor<strong>de</strong>n<br />

aanbevol<strong>en</strong> als hulp bij <strong>de</strong> monitor<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> verbeter<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit van <strong>de</strong> zorg die<br />

wor<strong>de</strong>n verstrekt <strong>in</strong> Belgische <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>? Welke zijn <strong>de</strong> algem<strong>en</strong>e<br />

eig<strong>en</strong>schapp<strong>en</strong> van het g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>beheer <strong>in</strong> Belgische <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>?<br />

Welke organisatiek<strong>en</strong>merk<strong>en</strong> hou<strong>de</strong>n verband met <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit van het<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik? Aangezi<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> bestaan<strong>de</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istratieve databases niet alle<br />

nodige <strong>in</strong>formatie bevatt<strong>en</strong>, werd e<strong>en</strong> veldon<strong>de</strong>rzoek gedaan bij e<strong>en</strong> aantal<br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> hun bewoners.<br />

ALGEMENE KENMERKEN VAN DE LANGDURIGE<br />

RESIDENTIËLE ZORG VOOR OUDEREN IN BELGIË<br />

België heeft e<strong>en</strong> vrij uniek mo<strong>de</strong>l van langdurige resi<strong>de</strong>ntiële zorg voor ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Rusthuiz<strong>en</strong> (ROB) bie<strong>de</strong>n e<strong>en</strong> thuisvervang<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> omgev<strong>in</strong>g wanneer <strong>de</strong> mogelijkhe<strong>de</strong>n<br />

<strong>in</strong>zake thuiszorg of korte <strong>in</strong>tramurale zorg niet meer volstaan. Rust- <strong>en</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> (RVT) zijn bedoeld voor patiënt<strong>en</strong> die langdurige verzorg<strong>in</strong>g nodig<br />

hebb<strong>en</strong>, <strong>en</strong> die voor hun dagelijkse activiteit<strong>en</strong> sterk afhang<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> hulp van an<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>.<br />

In Belgische resi<strong>de</strong>ntiële <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> voor ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> won<strong>en</strong> zowel patiënt<strong>en</strong> die licht als<br />

sterk afhankelijk zijn <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>te <strong>en</strong> niet-<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>te patiënt<strong>en</strong> sam<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> één <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> kunn<strong>en</strong> overstapp<strong>en</strong> van het éne zorgniveau naar het an<strong>de</strong>re - van e<strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>rust</strong>huis naar e<strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuis - zon<strong>de</strong>r het gebouw te verlat<strong>en</strong>. Op 31 <strong>de</strong>cember<br />

2004 war<strong>en</strong> er 665 zuivere <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong>, 970 gem<strong>en</strong>g<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> (ROB/RVT) <strong>en</strong><br />

45 zuivere verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>. Ongeveer 150,000 ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> verblev<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> e<strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>huis of<br />

e<strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- of verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuis <strong>in</strong> 2004. Meer dan 75% van h<strong>en</strong> war<strong>en</strong> vrouw<strong>en</strong>, 46% was<br />

ou<strong>de</strong>r dan 85.<br />

De resi<strong>de</strong>ntiële <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> voor ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> zijn over het hele land verspreid. Bijna elke<br />

geme<strong>en</strong>te heeft zijn eig<strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- of verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuis. Toch bestaan er belangrijke<br />

verschill<strong>en</strong> tuss<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> prov<strong>in</strong>cies <strong>en</strong> b<strong>in</strong>n<strong>en</strong> e<strong>en</strong>zelf<strong>de</strong> prov<strong>in</strong>cie wat betreft het aantal<br />

bed<strong>de</strong>n <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>. Op prov<strong>in</strong>ciaal niveau hebb<strong>en</strong> H<strong>en</strong>egouw<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> Luik veruit het<br />

grootste aantal leeftijd-gestratificeer<strong>de</strong> bed<strong>de</strong>n voor ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> (>4,099 bed<strong>de</strong>n per<br />

100,000 <strong>in</strong>woners vanaf 50 jaar), teg<strong>en</strong>over <strong>de</strong> prov<strong>in</strong>cies Limburg <strong>en</strong> Vlaams-Brabant<br />

die het laagste aantal hebb<strong>en</strong> (


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47A G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> ROB-RVT iii<br />

GEAGGREGEERD GENEESMIDDELENGEBRUIK IN<br />

RUSTHUIZEN EN RUST- EN<br />

VERZORGINGSTEHUIZEN<br />

De meeste <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> kop<strong>en</strong> hun g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> via lokale<br />

apothekers. G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> wor<strong>de</strong>n terugbetaald op e<strong>en</strong> betal<strong>in</strong>g per prestatie basis <strong>in</strong><br />

België. De Farmanet databank bevat ge<strong>de</strong>tailleer<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>formatie over voorschrift<strong>en</strong> die<br />

wor<strong>de</strong>n afgeleverd <strong>in</strong> lokale apothek<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> België. Aangezi<strong>en</strong> voorschrift<strong>en</strong> die wor<strong>de</strong>n<br />

afgeleverd <strong>in</strong> ziek<strong>en</strong>huisapothek<strong>en</strong> niet zijn opg<strong>en</strong>om<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> Farmanet, zijn onze ram<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong><br />

over het g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik lichtjes on<strong>de</strong>rschat. De gegev<strong>en</strong>s over het<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik wor<strong>de</strong>n <strong>in</strong>ge<strong>de</strong>eld volg<strong>en</strong>s het Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical<br />

(ATC) classificatiesysteem. Om <strong>de</strong> ver<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g van het g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik te<br />

berek<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong>, mak<strong>en</strong> we gebruik van <strong>de</strong> Def<strong>in</strong>ed Daily Dose (DDD).<br />

De vier belangrijkste ATC1-groep<strong>en</strong> van g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik bij<br />

geïnstitutionaliseer<strong>de</strong> ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> België hebb<strong>en</strong> betrekk<strong>in</strong>g op het cardiovasculaire,<br />

z<strong>en</strong>uw-, gastro-<strong>in</strong>test<strong>in</strong>aal <strong>en</strong> luchtweg<strong>en</strong>stelsel. Voor hart- <strong>en</strong> vaatziekt<strong>en</strong> is<br />

molsidom<strong>in</strong>e het meest voorgeschrev<strong>en</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l, gevolgd door <strong>en</strong>kele mid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong><br />

teg<strong>en</strong> hoge bloeddruk, teg<strong>en</strong> aritmie van klasse III <strong>en</strong> stat<strong>in</strong>es. De groep g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong><br />

voor het z<strong>en</strong>uwstelsel wordt overheerst door anti<strong>de</strong>pressiva, <strong>de</strong> twee<strong>de</strong> plaats wordt<br />

<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>om<strong>en</strong> door atypische antipsychotica. Bov<strong>en</strong>di<strong>en</strong> wordt betahist<strong>in</strong>e nog steeds <strong>in</strong><br />

ruime mate gebruikt. Voor het maag- <strong>en</strong> darmstelsel zijn g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> om peptische<br />

ziektes te behan<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> het meest gebruikt. Bij <strong>de</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> werk<strong>en</strong>d op het<br />

metabolisme vorm<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> orale antidiabetica <strong>de</strong> grootste groep. Mucolytica wor<strong>de</strong>n nog<br />

<strong>in</strong> ruime mate gebruikt. Ze wor<strong>de</strong>n gevolgd door verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>halatiepreparat<strong>en</strong> die<br />

wor<strong>de</strong>n gebruikt voor obstructieve longziektes. Er bestaan dui<strong>de</strong>lijke geografische<br />

verschill<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> het voorschrijv<strong>en</strong> voor meer<strong>de</strong>re g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>klass<strong>en</strong>.<br />

GEAGGREGEERDE UITGAVEN IN RUSTHUIZEN EN<br />

RUST- EN VERZORGINGSTEHUIZEN<br />

De totale uitgav<strong>en</strong> voor farmaceutische specialiteit<strong>en</strong> afgeleverd door lokale apothek<strong>en</strong><br />

voor resi<strong>de</strong>ntiële ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> liep<strong>en</strong> op tot meer dan 130 miljo<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> 2004. 82% werd<br />

betaald door <strong>de</strong> ziekteverzeker<strong>in</strong>g, 18% door <strong>de</strong> bewoners zelf. Anti<strong>de</strong>pressiva,<br />

antipsychotica <strong>en</strong> antitrombotische mid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> zorg<strong>en</strong> voor <strong>de</strong> hoogste kost<strong>en</strong> voor <strong>de</strong><br />

ziekteverzeker<strong>in</strong>g. Sam<strong>en</strong> zijn <strong>de</strong> 10 meest voorgeschrev<strong>en</strong> ATC3-klass<strong>en</strong> goed voor<br />

bijna <strong>de</strong> helft van het totale budget. De prijs van e<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividueel g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l is echter<br />

ook e<strong>en</strong> belangrijke <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>ant van <strong>de</strong> budgetimpact voor <strong>de</strong> ziekteverzeker<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Vooral g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> die <strong>in</strong>fectieziekt<strong>en</strong> voorkom<strong>en</strong> of behan<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> (griepvacc<strong>in</strong>,<br />

verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> antibiotica <strong>en</strong> antimycotica) hebb<strong>en</strong> e<strong>en</strong> hogere <strong>in</strong>dividuele kost.<br />

Daarnaast is ook <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividuele kost voor verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> hormon<strong>en</strong>, g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong><br />

teg<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> ziekte van Alzheimer, antipsychotica <strong>en</strong> opioï<strong>de</strong>n vrij hoog.<br />

LITERATUUR OVER HET<br />

GENEESMIDDELENGEBRUIK IN<br />

VERZORGINGSTEHUIZEN VOOR OUDEREN<br />

De besprek<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternationale literatuur over het g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik <strong>in</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> maakt gebruik van MEDLINE, International Pharmaceutical<br />

Abstracts <strong>en</strong> EMBASE, met behulp van e<strong>en</strong> zoekstrategie op basis van 6 reeks<strong>en</strong><br />

sleutelwoor<strong>de</strong>n. Er wer<strong>de</strong>n relevante refer<strong>en</strong>ties uit relevante artikel<strong>en</strong> gehaald<br />

(sneeuwbalmetho<strong>de</strong>). E<strong>en</strong> beperkte reeks van 40 uiterst relevante artikel<strong>en</strong> werd als<br />

vertrekpunt gehanteerd om het related articles algoritme <strong>in</strong> Pubmed toe te pass<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong>


iv G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> ROB-RVT <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47A<br />

om te zoek<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> Web of Sci<strong>en</strong>ce. Deze strategie leid<strong>de</strong> uite<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>lijk tot 170 relevante<br />

artikel<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Deze artikel<strong>en</strong> kwam<strong>en</strong> aan bod <strong>in</strong> e<strong>en</strong> narratieve besprek<strong>in</strong>g, niet <strong>in</strong> e<strong>en</strong> systematische<br />

besprek<strong>in</strong>g. De bedoel<strong>in</strong>g hiervan was e<strong>en</strong> breedschalig overzicht te gev<strong>en</strong> van het<br />

on<strong>de</strong>rwerp als voorbereid<strong>in</strong>g op <strong>de</strong> veldstudie, om <strong>de</strong> nodige elem<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong> te lever<strong>en</strong> om<br />

vrag<strong>en</strong>lijst<strong>en</strong> op te stell<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> om bestaan<strong>de</strong> sets van kwaliteits<strong>in</strong>dicator<strong>en</strong> te beoor<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong><br />

op hun relevantie <strong>in</strong> het ka<strong>de</strong>r van verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> voor ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>. Er wer<strong>de</strong>n ge<strong>en</strong><br />

pog<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> gedaan tot formele gegev<strong>en</strong>sextractie voor het sam<strong>en</strong>voeg<strong>en</strong> van gegev<strong>en</strong>s.<br />

Het belangrijkste besluit van dit literatuuroverzicht is dat verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tiestrategieën <strong>in</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit van het voorschrijfgedrag<br />

kunn<strong>en</strong> verbeter<strong>en</strong>. Er bestaat <strong>en</strong>ig bewijs van <strong>de</strong> effectiviteit voor farmaceutische zorg<br />

<strong>en</strong> multidiscipl<strong>in</strong>aire <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>ties, waarbij het hele team van zorgverl<strong>en</strong>ers betrokk<strong>en</strong> is.<br />

De omvang, expertise <strong>en</strong> cultuur van het verpleg<strong>en</strong>d personeel is belangrijk voor <strong>de</strong><br />

kwaliteit van <strong>de</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>verstrekk<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> controleprocess<strong>en</strong>. Er is meer<br />

on<strong>de</strong>rzoek nodig naar <strong>de</strong> implem<strong>en</strong>tatie van g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>formularia <strong>in</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> naar het gebruik van <strong>in</strong>formatietechnologieën om het<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>beheer te verbeter<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Bestaand on<strong>de</strong>rzoek richt zich op structurele <strong>in</strong>dicator<strong>en</strong> (algem<strong>en</strong>e eig<strong>en</strong>schapp<strong>en</strong> van<br />

<strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> eig<strong>en</strong>schapp<strong>en</strong> van hun g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>beheersystem<strong>en</strong>). De impact<br />

van <strong>de</strong>ze structurele <strong>in</strong>dicator<strong>en</strong> op het voorschrijfproces is on<strong>de</strong>rzocht aan <strong>de</strong> hand<br />

van rec<strong>en</strong>t ontwikkel<strong>de</strong> proces<strong>in</strong>dicator<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> voorschrijfkwaliteit. Er wor<strong>de</strong>n<br />

verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> sets van kwaliteits<strong>in</strong>dicator<strong>en</strong> van het voorschrijv<strong>en</strong> ontwikkeld voor<br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>, die elk verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> aspect<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> voorschrijfkwaliteit met<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Ge<strong>en</strong> ervan is volledig gevali<strong>de</strong>erd of is universeel toepasbaar. Bov<strong>en</strong>di<strong>en</strong> ontbreekt het<br />

bewijs dat er e<strong>en</strong> verband bestaat tuss<strong>en</strong> structurele <strong>in</strong>dicator<strong>en</strong>, proces<strong>in</strong>dicator<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong><br />

directe met<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> van resultat<strong>en</strong> bij <strong>de</strong> bewoners.<br />

VELDONDERZOEK<br />

Rationale<br />

Uitgangspunt van het veldon<strong>de</strong>rzoek was <strong>de</strong> vaststell<strong>in</strong>g dat niet alle vrag<strong>en</strong> die <strong>in</strong> dit<br />

rapport aan bod kom<strong>en</strong> uitsluit<strong>en</strong>d beantwoord kunn<strong>en</strong> wor<strong>de</strong>n op basis van <strong>de</strong><br />

bestaan<strong>de</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istratieve datasets, zoals Farmanet. Om <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit van het<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik van resi<strong>de</strong>ntiële ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> te beoor<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> zijn betrouwbare<br />

gegev<strong>en</strong>s over <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> over <strong>de</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>nt onontbeerlijk. E<strong>en</strong> veldon<strong>de</strong>rzoek<br />

on<strong>de</strong>rvangt <strong>de</strong> meeste beperk<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istratieve datasets.<br />

Het belangrijkste doel van het veldon<strong>de</strong>rzoek (PHEBE-on<strong>de</strong>rzoek) was <strong>de</strong> relatie te<br />

on<strong>de</strong>rzoek<strong>en</strong> tuss<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutionele eig<strong>en</strong>schapp<strong>en</strong>, <strong>de</strong><br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>beheersystem<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit van het voorschrijfproces. Daarnaast<br />

wil<strong>de</strong> het on<strong>de</strong>rzoek bestaan<strong>de</strong> sets van kwaliteits<strong>in</strong>dicator<strong>en</strong> van het voorschrijv<strong>en</strong><br />

evaluer<strong>en</strong> met betrekk<strong>in</strong>g tot hun geschiktheid om te wor<strong>de</strong>n toegepast <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> Belgische<br />

context.<br />

Ontwerp <strong>en</strong> steekproefprocedure<br />

Het on<strong>de</strong>rzoek werd uitgevoerd als e<strong>en</strong> cross-sectioneel beschrijv<strong>en</strong>d on<strong>de</strong>rzoek van<br />

e<strong>en</strong> repres<strong>en</strong>tatieve steekproef van <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> hun <strong>in</strong>woners. Rust-<br />

<strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> (>30 bed<strong>de</strong>n, RVT-bed<strong>de</strong>n <strong>in</strong>begrep<strong>en</strong>) wer<strong>de</strong>n willekeurig<br />

geselecteerd (N=76) <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> prov<strong>in</strong>cies Antwerp<strong>en</strong>, Oost-Vlaan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> H<strong>en</strong>egouw<strong>en</strong> op<br />

basis van e<strong>en</strong> stratificatie volg<strong>en</strong>s <strong>de</strong> grootte (tot 90 of meer dan 90 <strong>in</strong>woners) <strong>en</strong> het<br />

type (op<strong>en</strong>baar, privé). In elke geselecteer<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g wer<strong>de</strong>n 40 bewoners willekeurig<br />

geselecteerd.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47A G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> ROB-RVT v<br />

Gegev<strong>en</strong>sverzamel<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Op het niveau van het <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuis wer<strong>de</strong>n gegev<strong>en</strong>s <strong>in</strong>gezameld aan <strong>de</strong><br />

hand van e<strong>en</strong> gestructureerd <strong>in</strong>terview met <strong>de</strong> directeur <strong>en</strong> één of twee<br />

hoofdverpleegsters. De gestructureer<strong>de</strong> vrag<strong>en</strong>lijst richtte zich op <strong>de</strong> eig<strong>en</strong>schapp<strong>en</strong> van<br />

het g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>beheersysteem. De organisatorische eig<strong>en</strong>schapp<strong>en</strong> van het<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>proces wer<strong>de</strong>n omgezet <strong>in</strong> e<strong>en</strong> scoresysteem met e<strong>en</strong> evaluatie van <strong>de</strong><br />

kwaliteit van <strong>de</strong> verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> aspect<strong>en</strong> van het g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>beheersysteem (gebruik<br />

van formularium, communicatie, bewar<strong>in</strong>g, bereid<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> toedi<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g van g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>).<br />

Op het niveau van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>woners wer<strong>de</strong>n adm<strong>in</strong>istratieve gegev<strong>en</strong>s verzameld <strong>en</strong> er werd<br />

e<strong>en</strong> kopie van <strong>de</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>fiche g<strong>en</strong>om<strong>en</strong>. De g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> op <strong>de</strong> fiche<br />

wer<strong>de</strong>n <strong>in</strong>gevoerd <strong>in</strong> e<strong>en</strong> database. E<strong>en</strong> afdruk werd verstuurd naar <strong>de</strong> behan<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong><br />

arts met <strong>de</strong> vraag <strong>de</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> te controler<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> aan te vull<strong>en</strong> met <strong>in</strong>formatie<br />

over kl<strong>in</strong>ische problem<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> zorgproblem<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> bewoner. Op die manier kon <strong>de</strong><br />

kwaliteit van het voorschrijfproces van g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> wor<strong>de</strong>n beoor<strong>de</strong>eld. We<br />

gebruikt<strong>en</strong> drie bestaan<strong>de</strong> sets van kwaliteits<strong>in</strong>dicator<strong>en</strong> van het voorschrijv<strong>en</strong>, die<br />

speciaal war<strong>en</strong> aangepast aan <strong>de</strong> situatie van ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>: <strong>de</strong> BEERS-criteria voor pot<strong>en</strong>tieel<br />

ongepast voorschrijv<strong>en</strong> voor ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>, <strong>de</strong> ACOVE-criteria voor onvoldo<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong><br />

voorschrijv<strong>en</strong> voor ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> BEDNURS (Berg<strong>en</strong> District Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Home Studie).<br />

Daarnaast voeg<strong>de</strong>n we nog 2 an<strong>de</strong>re kwaliteitsb<strong>en</strong>a<strong>de</strong>r<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> van het voorschrijfgedrag<br />

toe: gebruik van chronische b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es <strong>en</strong> Belgische g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> met e<strong>en</strong> lage<br />

bat<strong>en</strong>/risicoverhoud<strong>in</strong>g. Dit on<strong>de</strong>rzoek werd uitgevoerd <strong>in</strong> 76 willekeurig geselecteer<strong>de</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> bij 2,510 bewoners voor wie we over <strong>de</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istratieve<br />

gegev<strong>en</strong>s <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>fiche beschikt<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Organisatiek<strong>en</strong>merk<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong><br />

De geselecteer<strong>de</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> had<strong>de</strong>n e<strong>en</strong> gemid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>de</strong> capaciteit van<br />

106 bed<strong>de</strong>n (variër<strong>en</strong>d tuss<strong>en</strong> 35 - 306) <strong>en</strong> 1 tot 7 af<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>, vooral met e<strong>en</strong> gem<strong>en</strong>gd<br />

karakter <strong>en</strong> op<strong>en</strong> voor alle soort<strong>en</strong> bewoners. De grote meer<strong>de</strong>rheid van <strong>de</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> kocht <strong>de</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> bij e<strong>en</strong> lokale apotheek (83%), 1/4 met prijz<strong>en</strong> op<br />

basis van e<strong>en</strong> op<strong>en</strong>bare aanbested<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> 1/3 op basis van e<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>formele overe<strong>en</strong>komst.<br />

De meeste tehuiz<strong>en</strong> werkt<strong>en</strong> met e<strong>en</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>formularium, maar <strong>de</strong> mate van<br />

implem<strong>en</strong>tatie verschil<strong>de</strong> aanzi<strong>en</strong>lijk. De gebruikte g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>fiches wer<strong>de</strong>n <strong>in</strong> 21%<br />

van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> nog met <strong>de</strong> hand geschrev<strong>en</strong>. E<strong>en</strong> of meer van <strong>de</strong> verplichte items<br />

op <strong>de</strong> kaart ontbrak <strong>in</strong> 30% van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>. Kwaliteitsscores van het<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>beheersysteem toon<strong>de</strong>n e<strong>en</strong> ruime variatie <strong>in</strong> alle geëvalueer<strong>de</strong><br />

dome<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>. Voor <strong>de</strong> meeste dome<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong> lag <strong>de</strong> mediaanwaar<strong>de</strong> dicht bij nul, wat erop wijst<br />

dat alle<strong>en</strong> aan <strong>de</strong> wettelijke verplicht<strong>in</strong>g was voldaan.<br />

De kwaliteit van het g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>beheersysteem werd beïnvloed door <strong>de</strong> locatie van<br />

<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>de</strong> activiteit<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> lokale apotheker <strong>en</strong> vooral door <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit van het<br />

verpleg<strong>en</strong>d personeel (aantal bewoners behan<strong>de</strong>ld per opgelei<strong>de</strong> verpleegster <strong>en</strong><br />

perc<strong>en</strong>tage bachelorverpleegsters op het totale aantal verpleegsters).<br />

Eig<strong>en</strong>schapp<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> bewoners<br />

De geselecteer<strong>de</strong> bewoners had<strong>de</strong>n e<strong>en</strong> gemid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>de</strong> leeftijd van 85 jaar (variër<strong>en</strong>d<br />

tuss<strong>en</strong> 36 <strong>en</strong> 104), 77% van h<strong>en</strong> war<strong>en</strong> vrouw<strong>en</strong>. De score voor kl<strong>in</strong>ische problem<strong>en</strong>,<br />

opgetek<strong>en</strong>d door <strong>de</strong> verantwoor<strong>de</strong>lijke arts, lag tuss<strong>en</strong> 0 <strong>en</strong> 12 (gemid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>de</strong> 2.7). Hart-<br />

<strong>en</strong> vaatziekt<strong>en</strong> wer<strong>de</strong>n het meest vastgesteld. Daar<strong>en</strong>bov<strong>en</strong> had<strong>de</strong>n <strong>de</strong> bewoners tuss<strong>en</strong><br />

0 <strong>en</strong> 15 zorgproblem<strong>en</strong> (gemid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>de</strong> 2.7). Van alle bewoners had 46% <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tie <strong>en</strong> was<br />

35% <strong>de</strong>pressief.<br />

Bewoners kreg<strong>en</strong> tuss<strong>en</strong> 0 <strong>en</strong> 22 g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>, die vermeld ston<strong>de</strong>n op hun<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>fiche (gemid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>de</strong> 8.1). De meeste war<strong>en</strong> voor chronisch gebruik (88%),<br />

3% was acute medicatie <strong>en</strong> 9% <strong>in</strong>di<strong>en</strong> nodig . Het hoogste verbruik werd vastgesteld<br />

voor psycholeptica (b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es of antipsychotica) (68% van <strong>de</strong> bewoners), laxativa<br />

(50%) <strong>en</strong> anti<strong>de</strong>pressiva (46%). De totale gemid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>de</strong> uitgave per maand <strong>en</strong> per bewoner<br />

voor chronische medicatie werd geraamd op 140 , waaron<strong>de</strong>r e<strong>en</strong> gemid<strong>de</strong>ld remgeld


vi G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> ROB-RVT <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47A<br />

van 23 voor terugbetaal<strong>de</strong> medicatie <strong>en</strong> e<strong>en</strong> gemid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>de</strong> eig<strong>en</strong> betal<strong>in</strong>g van 27 voor<br />

niet terugbetaal<strong>de</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Kwaliteit van het voorschrijv<strong>en</strong> van g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong><br />

Bij <strong>de</strong> beoor<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit van het voorschrijv<strong>en</strong> wer<strong>de</strong>n <strong>de</strong> meeste problem<strong>en</strong><br />

opgemerkt bij het gebruik van ACOVE-, BEDNURS- <strong>en</strong> BEERS-criteria.<br />

On<strong>de</strong>rbehan<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g werd voornamelijk vastgesteld bij patiënt<strong>en</strong> met hartstoorniss<strong>en</strong>.<br />

BEDNURS scoor<strong>de</strong> bijzon<strong>de</strong>r hoog voor <strong>de</strong> comb<strong>in</strong>atie van psychotropische<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>. BEERS stel<strong>de</strong> vooral het mogelijks ongepaste gebruik vast van digox<strong>in</strong>e,<br />

oxybuty<strong>in</strong>e <strong>en</strong> amiodarone. De globale score voor problem<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> voorschrijfkwaliteit lag<br />

tuss<strong>en</strong> 0 tot 13 per bewoner (mediaan 2) <strong>en</strong> toon<strong>de</strong> e<strong>en</strong> bre<strong>de</strong> variatie tuss<strong>en</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>.<br />

De hoeveelheid gebruikte chronische g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> werd voornamelijk beïnvloed<br />

door polypathologie <strong>en</strong> het aantal zorgproblem<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> bewoner. De hoeveelheid<br />

gebruikte g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> was lager bij <strong>de</strong> oudst<strong>en</strong>, bij <strong>de</strong> <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>te populatie <strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong><br />

laatste fas<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> palliatieve zorg. Op het niveau van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g was <strong>de</strong> hoeveelheid<br />

gebruikte medicatie <strong>in</strong> belangrijke mate beïnvloed door <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>br<strong>en</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> lokale<br />

apotheker. Ze was het laagst <strong>in</strong> grote OCMW-verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Institutionele eig<strong>en</strong>schapp<strong>en</strong> had<strong>de</strong>n e<strong>en</strong> belangrijke <strong>in</strong>vloed op <strong>de</strong> uitgav<strong>en</strong> voor<br />

chronische g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>. Het perc<strong>en</strong>tage goedkope g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> werd beïnvloed<br />

door <strong>de</strong> locatie van het verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuis, het gebruik van e<strong>en</strong><br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>formularium, <strong>de</strong> activiteit<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> coörd<strong>in</strong>er<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> arts <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> lokale<br />

apotheker <strong>en</strong> het bestaan van e<strong>en</strong> systeem van prijsconcurr<strong>en</strong>tie voor <strong>de</strong> aflever<strong>in</strong>g van<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>.<br />

De totale score van problem<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> voorschrijfkwaliteit nam toe bij hogere polypathologie<br />

<strong>en</strong> bij grotere <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>, <strong>en</strong> daal<strong>de</strong> bij e<strong>en</strong> groter aantal bewoners dat werd behan<strong>de</strong>ld<br />

door <strong>de</strong> CRA, e<strong>en</strong> groter aantal activiteit<strong>en</strong> die <strong>de</strong> apotheker uitvoer<strong>de</strong>, e<strong>en</strong> hogere<br />

gemid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>de</strong> leeftijd van <strong>de</strong> bewoners <strong>en</strong> e<strong>en</strong> hoger perc<strong>en</strong>tage van <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tie.<br />

DISCUSSIE EN ALGEMENE CONCLUSIES<br />

België heeft e<strong>en</strong> goed uitgebouwd netwerk van <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> b<strong>in</strong>n<strong>en</strong> zijn ste<strong>de</strong>n <strong>en</strong> dorp<strong>en</strong>, die wor<strong>de</strong>n geleid door <strong>de</strong> sociale<br />

di<strong>en</strong>st<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> geme<strong>en</strong>te, door VZW s <strong>en</strong> door privé-ver<strong>en</strong>ig<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> met w<strong>in</strong>stoogmerk.<br />

Rusthuiz<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> zijn niet gespecialiseerd <strong>in</strong> specifieke ziektes,<br />

maar bewoners met verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> medische problem<strong>en</strong> won<strong>en</strong> er sam<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> één<br />

<strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g. Vele bewoners wor<strong>de</strong>n nog gevolgd door hun vroegere huisarts, maar <strong>in</strong><br />

sommige <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> is <strong>de</strong> coörd<strong>in</strong>er<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> arts verantwoor<strong>de</strong>lijk voor<br />

meer dan <strong>de</strong> helft van <strong>de</strong> bewoners van het tehuis.<br />

De grote meer<strong>de</strong>rheid van <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> wordt bedi<strong>en</strong>d door lokale<br />

apothekers, die zich we<strong>in</strong>ig bezighou<strong>de</strong>n met kl<strong>in</strong>ische apothekersactiviteit<strong>en</strong>. Zowat<br />

e<strong>en</strong> op ti<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> wordt bedi<strong>en</strong>d door e<strong>en</strong> ziek<strong>en</strong>huisapotheker. De<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>beheersystem<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> zijn slechts beperkt<br />

uitgebouwd <strong>en</strong> richt<strong>en</strong> zich vooral op het distributieproces b<strong>in</strong>n<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>en</strong><br />

m<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>r op <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit van het voorschrijv<strong>en</strong>. We<strong>in</strong>ig bewoners slag<strong>en</strong> er<strong>in</strong> <strong>en</strong>ige vorm<br />

van autonomie te behou<strong>de</strong>n over hun medicatie, behalve <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> met e<strong>en</strong><br />

beperkte personeelsbezett<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> e<strong>en</strong> slecht uitgebouwd distributiebeheer. Hoewel er<br />

s<strong>in</strong>ds 2004 e<strong>en</strong> formularium bestaat (RVT Formularium) voor <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> als gids voor het nastrev<strong>en</strong> van rationeel voorschrijfgedrag, lijkt <strong>de</strong><br />

implem<strong>en</strong>tatie van dit formularium <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> impact ervan op <strong>de</strong> keuze van g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong><br />

van <strong>de</strong> bezoek<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> arts<strong>en</strong> beperkt. Verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> die wor<strong>de</strong>n geleid door <strong>de</strong><br />

sociale di<strong>en</strong>st van <strong>de</strong> geme<strong>en</strong>te (OCMW) hebb<strong>en</strong> vaker e<strong>en</strong> ziek<strong>en</strong>huisapotheker die<br />

<strong>in</strong>staat voor <strong>de</strong> toelever<strong>in</strong>g van g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> aan <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g, hebb<strong>en</strong> vaker e<strong>en</strong><br />

coörd<strong>in</strong>er<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> arts die e<strong>en</strong> groot aantal bewoners b<strong>in</strong>n<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g behan<strong>de</strong>lt, <strong>en</strong><br />

hebb<strong>en</strong> ook vaker meer <strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong>se g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>beheersystem<strong>en</strong>.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47A G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> ROB-RVT vii<br />

Bewoners van <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> g<strong>en</strong>erer<strong>en</strong> aanzi<strong>en</strong>lijke<br />

publieke uitgav<strong>en</strong> voor farmaceutische specialiteit<strong>en</strong> (123 miljo<strong>en</strong> per jaar). Het<br />

veldon<strong>de</strong>rzoek toon<strong>de</strong> aan dat bewoners ook grote bedrag<strong>en</strong> zelf betal<strong>en</strong> voor het<br />

remgeld van terugbetaal<strong>de</strong> chronische g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>, <strong>en</strong> voor betal<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> aan <strong>de</strong><br />

apotheker voor niet-terugbetaal<strong>de</strong> medicatie. Hoewel slechts 1.4% van <strong>de</strong> bevolk<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

e<strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>huis of e<strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuis woont, wijz<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> gegev<strong>en</strong>s uit dit<br />

veldon<strong>de</strong>rzoek <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> gegev<strong>en</strong>s van nationale facturatiedatases erop dat meer dan 5.6%<br />

van <strong>de</strong> publieke uitgav<strong>en</strong> voor g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> (farmaceutische specialiteit<strong>en</strong>) wor<strong>de</strong>n<br />

geg<strong>en</strong>ereerd door bewoners van resi<strong>de</strong>ntiële <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> voor ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Met betrekk<strong>in</strong>g tot <strong>de</strong> voorschrijfkwaliteit stell<strong>en</strong> we aanzi<strong>en</strong>lijke polyfarmacie vast bij<br />

<strong>de</strong> meeste bewoners. Het grote aantal g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>comb<strong>in</strong>aties<br />

op zich zou<strong>de</strong>n e<strong>en</strong> re<strong>de</strong>n voor bezorgdheid kunn<strong>en</strong> zijn. An<strong>de</strong>rzijds kampt <strong>de</strong> helft van<br />

<strong>de</strong> bewoners met m<strong>in</strong>st<strong>en</strong>s één pot<strong>en</strong>tieel probleem door het te we<strong>in</strong>ig voorschrijv<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Het chronische gebruik van b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es, anti<strong>de</strong>pressiva <strong>en</strong> antipsychotica (vaak <strong>in</strong><br />

comb<strong>in</strong>atie) is echter opvall<strong>en</strong>d hoog. Zowel <strong>de</strong> analyse van <strong>de</strong> nationale gegev<strong>en</strong>s als<br />

het veldon<strong>de</strong>rzoek toont aan dat er nog steeds verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> verou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>de</strong><br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> of g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> waarvan <strong>de</strong> kl<strong>in</strong>ische <strong>en</strong> kost<strong>en</strong>effectiviteit <strong>in</strong> vraag<br />

moet<strong>en</strong> gesteld wor<strong>de</strong>n, <strong>in</strong> gebruik zijn.<br />

Het aantal vastgestel<strong>de</strong> kwaliteitsproblem<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> aanwezigheid van polypathologie zijn<br />

dui<strong>de</strong>lijk gerelateerd. We stell<strong>en</strong> e<strong>en</strong> dal<strong>in</strong>g vast <strong>in</strong> het aantal kwaliteitsproblem<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> die<br />

<strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> waar <strong>de</strong> coörd<strong>in</strong>er<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> arts e<strong>en</strong> groot aantal patiënt<strong>en</strong> behan<strong>de</strong>lt <strong>en</strong> waar<br />

<strong>de</strong> lokale apotheker e<strong>en</strong> actieve rol speelt <strong>in</strong> het g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>beheer. Om het<br />

verschil <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> voorschrijfkwaliteit volledig te begrijp<strong>en</strong>, moet echter rek<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g wor<strong>de</strong>n<br />

gehou<strong>de</strong>n met <strong>de</strong> sleutelrol van <strong>de</strong> voorschrijv<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> arts.<br />

Interv<strong>en</strong>ties om <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> betaalbaarheid van g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> te verhog<strong>en</strong>, zull<strong>en</strong> meer r<strong>en</strong>dabel zijn als ze niet alle<strong>en</strong> e<strong>en</strong> impact<br />

hebb<strong>en</strong> op het keuzeproces van g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> voor bewoners van <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>, maar ook op het keuzeproces voor àlle ou<strong>de</strong>re patiënt<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong><br />

huisarts<strong>en</strong>.<br />

BELEIDSAANBEVELINGEN<br />

1. S<strong>in</strong>ds 2004 is er e<strong>en</strong> wettelijke verplicht<strong>in</strong>g voor <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> om e<strong>en</strong><br />

formularium te hebb<strong>en</strong> als leidraad bij het rationeel voorschrijv<strong>en</strong>. Er moet<strong>en</strong><br />

maatregel<strong>en</strong> g<strong>en</strong>om<strong>en</strong> wor<strong>de</strong>n om <strong>de</strong> implem<strong>en</strong>tatie te verbeter<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> impact <strong>in</strong> <strong>rust</strong>-<br />

<strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> te versterk<strong>en</strong>. Op basis van <strong>de</strong> resultat<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong>ze<br />

studie moet hier<strong>in</strong> e<strong>en</strong> grotere rol toebe<strong>de</strong>eld wor<strong>de</strong>n aan <strong>de</strong> coörd<strong>in</strong>er<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> arts. Het<br />

formularium kan e<strong>en</strong> sleutelrol spel<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> overdracht van k<strong>en</strong>nis over best practices<br />

naar voorschrijv<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> arts<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>, <strong>in</strong> het lokaal<br />

implem<strong>en</strong>ter<strong>en</strong> van richtlijn<strong>en</strong> over farmacologie <strong>en</strong> van system<strong>en</strong> van kwaliteitsbeheer.<br />

E<strong>en</strong> voortdur<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> nauwe sam<strong>en</strong>werk<strong>in</strong>g tuss<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> wet<strong>en</strong>schappelijke <strong>en</strong><br />

professionele organisaties is van groot belang. De organisaties die onafhankelijke<br />

farmacotherapeutische <strong>in</strong>formatie lever<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> die <strong>in</strong>staan voor farmacovigilantie zou<strong>de</strong>n<br />

<strong>in</strong> staat moet<strong>en</strong> gesteld wor<strong>de</strong>n hun <strong>in</strong>spann<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> te vergrot<strong>en</strong> om sam<strong>en</strong>vatt<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> van<br />

<strong>de</strong> evi<strong>de</strong>ntie te mak<strong>en</strong> over het gepast voorschrijv<strong>en</strong> van g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> om het<br />

bewustzijn te vergrot<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> risico s verbon<strong>de</strong>n aan het gebruik van g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong><br />

bij ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>.<br />

2. Lokale afsprak<strong>en</strong> tuss<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>, voorschrijv<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> arts<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> apothekers over <strong>de</strong><br />

concrete keuze van g<strong>en</strong>erische g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> kunn<strong>en</strong> het gebruik ervan stimuler<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Mom<strong>en</strong>teel kan <strong>de</strong> soms zeer ruime beschikbaarheid van verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> molecul<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong><br />

wissel<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> toelever<strong>in</strong>g naargelang <strong>de</strong> apotheker <strong>de</strong> praktische haalbaarheid van<br />

e<strong>en</strong> keuze voor g<strong>en</strong>erische g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> beperk<strong>en</strong>. De mogelijkhe<strong>de</strong>n <strong>in</strong>zake<br />

toepass<strong>in</strong>g van unit-dose waarbij g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> per <strong>in</strong>dividuele patiënt verpakt<br />

wor<strong>de</strong>n, zou<strong>de</strong>n moet<strong>en</strong> on<strong>de</strong>rzocht wor<strong>de</strong>n.<br />

3. De traditionele opleid<strong>in</strong>g van verpleegsters <strong>en</strong> apothekers di<strong>en</strong>t, <strong>in</strong> sam<strong>en</strong>werk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

met <strong>de</strong> coörd<strong>in</strong>er<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> arts, geheroriënteerd te wor<strong>de</strong>n naar <strong>de</strong> nieuwe rol van <strong>de</strong>ze<br />

beroep<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> beheersystem<strong>en</strong> voor medicatie <strong>in</strong> gezondheids<strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>. Betere tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g


viii G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> ROB-RVT <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47A<br />

van verpleegkundig<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> farmacologie <strong>en</strong> e<strong>en</strong> betere communicatie met <strong>de</strong> aflever<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong><br />

apotheker <strong>en</strong> voorschrijv<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> arts kunn<strong>en</strong> zorg<strong>en</strong> voor e<strong>en</strong> betere kwaliteit van <strong>de</strong><br />

farmaceutische zorg<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> het <strong>rust</strong> -<strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuis. Kl<strong>in</strong>ische apothekers kunn<strong>en</strong><br />

hierbij help<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong>elnem<strong>en</strong> aan <strong>de</strong> organisatie van alle stadia van het proces van het<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik: het voorschrijv<strong>en</strong>, aankop<strong>en</strong>, verpakk<strong>en</strong>, adm<strong>in</strong>istratie- <strong>en</strong><br />

ver<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>gssysteem van g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> opvolg<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> werkzaamheid <strong>en</strong> veiligheid<br />

van <strong>de</strong> farmacotherapie.<br />

4. G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> die wor<strong>de</strong>n geleverd door <strong>de</strong> lokale apotheker wor<strong>de</strong>n mom<strong>en</strong>teel<br />

terugbetaald op e<strong>en</strong> fee-for-service basis. De voor- <strong>en</strong> na<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> van dit systeem zijn<br />

gek<strong>en</strong>d. In e<strong>en</strong> pog<strong>in</strong>g om stimulans<strong>en</strong> voor kwaliteitsverhog<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> kost<strong>en</strong>beheers<strong>in</strong>g te<br />

comb<strong>in</strong>er<strong>en</strong>, zou<strong>de</strong>n an<strong>de</strong>re f<strong>in</strong>ancier<strong>in</strong>gssystem<strong>en</strong> moet<strong>en</strong> wor<strong>de</strong>n on<strong>de</strong>rzocht. Casemix<br />

budgetter<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> refer<strong>en</strong>tieprijz<strong>en</strong> zijn twee mogelijke alternatiev<strong>en</strong> die na<strong>de</strong>r<br />

on<strong>de</strong>rzocht moet<strong>en</strong> wor<strong>de</strong>n.<br />

5. On<strong>de</strong>rzoeksag<strong>en</strong>da:<br />

Gegev<strong>en</strong> het aantal voorschrift<strong>en</strong> voor bepaal<strong>de</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>, zijn<br />

voor <strong>de</strong> volksgezondheid <strong>in</strong> sommige Belgische regio's ver<strong>de</strong>re<br />

epi<strong>de</strong>miologische on<strong>de</strong>rzoek<strong>en</strong> nodig over <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>ci<strong>de</strong>ntie <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong><br />

preval<strong>en</strong>tie van aando<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> zoals majeure <strong>de</strong>pressie, gedragsmatige<br />

<strong>en</strong> psychologische symptom<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tie, ziekte van M<strong>en</strong>ière, diepe<br />

v<strong>en</strong>euze trombose, coronaire syndrom<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> ang<strong>in</strong>a pectoris.<br />

Er is nood aan betrouwbare <strong>en</strong> hanteerbare schal<strong>en</strong> voor het bepal<strong>en</strong><br />

van <strong>de</strong> zorgbehoefte van <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> cont<strong>in</strong>ue bepal<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong><br />

functionele <strong>en</strong> kl<strong>in</strong>ische status van <strong>in</strong>dividuele resi<strong>de</strong>nt<strong>en</strong>. Gezi<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong><br />

aankom<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> digitale revolutie <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> voor gezondheidszorg,<br />

kan on<strong>de</strong>rzocht wor<strong>de</strong>n hoe <strong>de</strong> metho<strong>de</strong>s voor gegev<strong>en</strong>sverzamel<strong>in</strong>g<br />

voor farmaceutische <strong>en</strong> kl<strong>in</strong>ische gegev<strong>en</strong>s die <strong>in</strong> dit on<strong>de</strong>rzoek zijn<br />

gehanteerd, kunn<strong>en</strong> gebruikt wor<strong>de</strong>n voor cont<strong>in</strong>ue, geautomatiseer<strong>de</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>zamel<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> het gev<strong>en</strong> van feedback. Er is nood aan metho<strong>de</strong>s die<br />

uitkomstgegev<strong>en</strong>s (kwaliteit van lev<strong>en</strong>, hospitalisaties <strong>en</strong> overlij<strong>de</strong>ns, al<br />

dan niet gebon<strong>de</strong>n aan g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>) bepal<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong>ze <strong>in</strong>tegrer<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong><br />

het on<strong>de</strong>rzoek naar <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit van het voorschrijv<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> van het<br />

beheer van <strong>de</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>rust</strong> -<strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>.<br />

E<strong>en</strong> vergelijkbare epi<strong>de</strong>miologische studie van het<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik <strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> kwaliteit van het voorschrijv<strong>en</strong> zou<br />

moet<strong>en</strong> uitgevoerd wor<strong>de</strong>n bij kwetsbare ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> thuiszorg.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 1<br />

Table of cont<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

Sci<strong>en</strong>tific summary<br />

SCIENTIFIC SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 1<br />

1 ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS AND AGGREGATED MEDICATION<br />

USE IN BELGIAN REST AND NURSING HOMES..................................................... 3<br />

1.1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................ 3<br />

1.2 A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE BELGIAN RESIDENTIAL LONG-TERM CARE FOR THE<br />

ELDERLY ........................................................................................................................................................ 4<br />

1.2.1 Resi<strong>de</strong>ntial long-term care sett<strong>in</strong>gs .............................................................................................. 4<br />

1.2.2 F<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g of rest homes and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes............................................................................... 9<br />

1.2.3 Staff....................................................................................................................................................12<br />

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS .........................................................................................................................15<br />

1.4 PREVIOUS STUDIES FOR BELGIUM.....................................................................................................16<br />

1.5 AGGREGATED DATA ON MEDICATION USE AND EXPENDITURES IN REST AND<br />

NURSING HOMES IN BELGIUM ...........................................................................................................20<br />

1.5.1 Use of medication by differ<strong>en</strong>t levels of ATC group..............................................................20<br />

1.5.2 Exp<strong>en</strong>ditures of prescribed medic<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong> Belgian rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes ........................23<br />

1.6 RATIONALE FOR A FIELD STUDY ......................................................................................................25<br />

2 REVIEW OF THE INTERNATIONAL LITERATURE ON THE USE OF<br />

MEDICATION IN NURSING HOMES........................................................................ 27<br />

2.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE LITERATURE REVIEW.....................................................................................27<br />

2.2 METHODS OF THE REVIEW..................................................................................................................27<br />

2.3 RESULTS OF THE LITERATURE REVIEW ...........................................................................................28<br />

2.3.1 Why are el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong>stitutionalized? ..............................................................................................28<br />

2.3.2 What are the most preval<strong>en</strong>t functional and cl<strong>in</strong>ical problems among resi<strong>de</strong>nts?...........29<br />

2.3.3 What are the problems with medication usage and how can quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g be<br />

assessed <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes?.......................................................................................................................33<br />

2.3.4 Which <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics are important for the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g?............36<br />

2.3.5 What is the effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess of <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tions (medication managem<strong>en</strong>t systems) with<br />

regard to the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes?.......................................................................41<br />

2.4 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION OF THE LITERATURE REVIEW .........................................45<br />

3 FIELD STUDY: PRESCRIBING IN HOMES FOR THE ELDERLY IN BELGIUM<br />

(PHEBE) .......................................................................................................................... 46<br />

3.1 SETTING ......................................................................................................................................................46<br />

3.2 OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................................................46<br />

3.3 METHODS ...................................................................................................................................................46<br />

3.3.1 Design...............................................................................................................................................46<br />

3.3.2 Sampl<strong>in</strong>g procedure .......................................................................................................................46<br />

3.3.3 Data collection at the level of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes...................................................................47<br />

3.3.4 Data collection at the level of resi<strong>de</strong>nts....................................................................................47<br />

3.3.5 Construction of databases ...........................................................................................................48<br />

3.3.6 Construction of quality scores....................................................................................................49<br />

3.3.7 Statistical analysis............................................................................................................................52<br />

3.3.8 Ethical consi<strong>de</strong>rations....................................................................................................................56<br />

3.4 RESULTS.......................................................................................................................................................56<br />

3.4.1 Repres<strong>en</strong>tativity of the sample....................................................................................................56<br />

3.4.2 Description of participat<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes..............................................................................57


2 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

3.4.3 Description of the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t system at the level of the <strong>in</strong>stitution .........58<br />

3.4.4 Description of the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t system at the level of the wards.................61<br />

3.4.5 Assessm<strong>en</strong>t of the quality of the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t system .....................................68<br />

3.4.6 Description of selected resi<strong>de</strong>nts...............................................................................................70<br />

3.4.7 Description of the medication used...........................................................................................76<br />

3.4.8 Assessm<strong>en</strong>t of quality of medication prescrib<strong>in</strong>g ....................................................................81<br />

3.4.9 Relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>nts characteristics and parameters of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality.87<br />

3.4.10 Univariate relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics and parameters of<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality at resi<strong>de</strong>nt level.........................................................................................................90<br />

3.4.11 Univariate analysis at <strong>in</strong>stitutional level ..................................................................................... 91<br />

3.4.12 Multivariate analysis .......................................................................................................................95<br />

4 DISCUSSION AND GENERAL CONCLUSIONS ..................................................... 97<br />

4.1 STRENGHTS OF THE STUDY................................................................................................................97<br />

4.2 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY .............................................................................................................97<br />

4.3 MEDICAL DISCUSSION OF THE DETECTED PRESCRIBING QUALITY PROBLEMS ............98<br />

4.3.1 Discussion on the national drug utilization data <strong>in</strong> rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes .....................98<br />

4.3.2 Discussion of the prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality problems <strong>de</strong>tected <strong>in</strong> the field study ....................101<br />

4.4 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................................106<br />

4.4.1 The magnitu<strong>de</strong> of medication use and costs for long-term resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> Belgium<br />

106<br />

4.4.2 The medical needs of resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes ................................................................106<br />

4.4.3 Measurem<strong>en</strong>t of the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g .............................................................................106<br />

4.4.4 The g<strong>en</strong>eral characteristics of Belgian nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and their medication managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

systems........................................................................................................................................................106<br />

4.4.5 Institutional characteristics associated with the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g.............................107<br />

4.4.6 Implications for research and practice.....................................................................................107


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 3<br />

1 ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS<br />

AND AGGREGATED MEDICATION USE IN<br />

BELGIAN REST AND NURSING HOMES<br />

Authors: Car<strong>in</strong>e Van <strong>de</strong> Voor<strong>de</strong>, Stephan Devriese, Marc De Falleur, Dirk Ramaekers<br />

1.1 INTRODUCTION<br />

On January 1, 2005 the el<strong>de</strong>rly (aged 65 and ol<strong>de</strong>r) repres<strong>en</strong>ted about 17.2% of the<br />

10.4 million Belgian <strong>in</strong>habitants, 1.6% was over 85 years. Curr<strong>en</strong>t <strong>de</strong>mographic<br />

projections suggest that approximately 19% of Belgium s population will be more than<br />

65 years by the year 2015, and that people more than 85 years will make up 2.7% of the<br />

total population. Furthermore it is projected that by the year 2030 almost 25% of the<br />

population will be aged 65 and ol<strong>de</strong>r and 3.2% will be 85 or ol<strong>de</strong>r. 1 These projections<br />

mean that <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g numbers of Belgians will be the ol<strong>de</strong>st old . The pot<strong>en</strong>tial<br />

consequ<strong>en</strong>ces of his <strong>de</strong>mographic shift over the next <strong>de</strong>ca<strong>de</strong>s for the organization and<br />

f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g of long-term care are a major policy concern and research topic <strong>in</strong> Belgium<br />

and other countries fac<strong>in</strong>g the same <strong>de</strong>mographic evolution. 2<br />

Although the health care needs of many ol<strong>de</strong>r people are not so differ<strong>en</strong>t from those of<br />

the rest of the population, for the ol<strong>de</strong>st old and those with chronic diseases or<br />

3, 2, 4, 5<br />

disability the preval<strong>en</strong>ce rate of long-term care is high and <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> Belgium.<br />

One elem<strong>en</strong>t of car<strong>in</strong>g for the el<strong>de</strong>rly is by mak<strong>in</strong>g sure they get the right medical care.<br />

The most common <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion that ol<strong>de</strong>r people experi<strong>en</strong>ce is the use of medication.<br />

It is well-known that ol<strong>de</strong>r people consume more medication than any other age group.<br />

They t<strong>en</strong>d to have more long-term, chronic illnesses such as arthritis, diabetes, high<br />

blood pressure and heart disease than do younger people. S<strong>in</strong>ce many el<strong>de</strong>rly have a<br />

number of diseases or disabilities at the same time, it is common for them to take<br />

multiple medications at the same time. The hazards of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g many drugs, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g<br />

si<strong>de</strong>-effects, drug <strong>in</strong>teractions, un<strong>de</strong>r-prescrib<strong>in</strong>g of pot<strong>en</strong>tially b<strong>en</strong>eficial drugs and<br />

difficulties of compliance, have be<strong>en</strong> recognized <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>ternational literature as<br />

particular problems wh<strong>en</strong> prescrib<strong>in</strong>g for el<strong>de</strong>rly people.<br />

The quality of medication use by resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly is a major concern because of an<br />

<strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g number of people <strong>in</strong> this segm<strong>en</strong>t of the population and the fact that they are<br />

major consumers of medic<strong>in</strong>es. The quality of medication use <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong>ds both on the<br />

quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g and the quality of medication managem<strong>en</strong>t. The medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>s the whole process from the prescrib<strong>in</strong>g of the medication,<br />

through the purchase, packag<strong>in</strong>g, security, adm<strong>in</strong>istration and distribution system, until<br />

the follow-up of pharmacotherapy. The <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>ants of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g and of the<br />

medication process for nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts are not well un<strong>de</strong>rstood, but<br />

organizational characteristics of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial sett<strong>in</strong>gs are a plausible candidate.<br />

I<strong>de</strong>ntification of factors <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>c<strong>in</strong>g the patterns of medication use <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

could lead to <strong>de</strong>velopm<strong>en</strong>t of strategies to optimize medication use with consequ<strong>en</strong>t<br />

improvem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>nts' health.<br />

In other countries, an <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g number of studies were carried out on the quality of<br />

medication use <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly resi<strong>de</strong>nts dur<strong>in</strong>g the last <strong>de</strong>ca<strong>de</strong>. In Belgium very little research<br />

has be<strong>en</strong> conducted on this topic, ma<strong>in</strong>ly due to a lack of readily available data on the<br />

consumption and quality of medication. The use of medication and prescrib<strong>in</strong>g patterns<br />

<strong>in</strong> old age and <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly are hardly docum<strong>en</strong>ted.<br />

Belgium has rather limited experi<strong>en</strong>ce with medication managem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care<br />

for the el<strong>de</strong>rly. Yet, dur<strong>in</strong>g the last years some <strong>in</strong>itiatives have be<strong>en</strong> tak<strong>en</strong> to improve<br />

the quality of the medication policy. S<strong>in</strong>ce 2000 each nurs<strong>in</strong>g home must have a medical<br />

coord<strong>in</strong>ator a . This is a g<strong>en</strong>eral practitioner, preferably with an additional formation <strong>in</strong><br />

a Royal Decree of June 24, 1999. Coörd<strong>in</strong>er<strong>en</strong>d <strong>en</strong> raadgev<strong>en</strong>d arts (CRA) <strong>in</strong> Dutch, mé<strong>de</strong>c<strong>in</strong><br />

coord<strong>in</strong>ateur et conseiller (MCC) <strong>in</strong> Fr<strong>en</strong>ch.


4 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

gerontology, who is responsible for the coord<strong>in</strong>ation of quality <strong>in</strong>itiatives and for the<br />

tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g of the staff. Regard<strong>in</strong>g medication policy the responsibility of the medical<br />

coord<strong>in</strong>ator <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>s the <strong>de</strong>velopm<strong>en</strong>t and use of a formulary. S<strong>in</strong>ce 2004 such a<br />

formulary (RVT Formularium b ) for nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes is available as a gui<strong>de</strong> to pursu<strong>in</strong>g<br />

rational prescrib<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

The objective of this study was to <strong>in</strong>vestigate the quality of medication use, prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and medication managem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial homes for the el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> Belgium. S<strong>in</strong>ce the<br />

available adm<strong>in</strong>istrative databases do not conta<strong>in</strong> all the <strong>in</strong>formation nee<strong>de</strong>d, a field<br />

study was carried out <strong>in</strong> a selection of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and resi<strong>de</strong>nts.<br />

This <strong>in</strong>troductory chapter pres<strong>en</strong>ts a g<strong>en</strong>eral overview of the organization and f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g<br />

of the Belgian resi<strong>de</strong>ntial long-term care for the el<strong>de</strong>rly (section 1.2). Section 1.3<br />

specifies the research questions. Some previous studies on medication use <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial<br />

homes for the el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> Belgium are summarized (section 1.4) and aggregate data on<br />

medications use and exp<strong>en</strong>ditures are provi<strong>de</strong>d (section 1.5). Section 1.6 <strong>in</strong>troduces the<br />

rationale for the field study.<br />

Chapter 2 provi<strong>de</strong>s a report of an <strong>in</strong>ternational literature search on the needs of<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts, on the medication use <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and on organizational<br />

characteristics which may affect the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g and the quality of medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t.<br />

Chapter 3 is the ma<strong>in</strong> part of the report and conta<strong>in</strong>s the sett<strong>in</strong>g, objectives, methods<br />

and results of the field study carried out <strong>in</strong> a selection of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and their<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts.<br />

Chapter 4 discusses and conclu<strong>de</strong>s the f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs of the report and pres<strong>en</strong>ts the policy<br />

recomm<strong>en</strong>dations.<br />

1.2 A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE BELGIAN RESIDENTIAL<br />

LONG-TERM CARE FOR THE ELDERLY c<br />

1.2.1 Resi<strong>de</strong>ntial long-term care sett<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

Long-term care and resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care are not easy to <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>e. However, <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g the<br />

boundaries among primary, acute and long-term care and the role of resi<strong>de</strong>nce for an<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly population go far beyond the limits of this study. Instead, we follow the<br />

<strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ition of long-term resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care of the WHO 6 : Institutional or resi<strong>de</strong>ntial longterm<br />

care is <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed as the provision of care to three or more unrelated people <strong>in</strong> the<br />

same place. Activities un<strong>de</strong>rtak<strong>en</strong> by formal caregivers may be publicly f<strong>in</strong>anced and<br />

organized, but the services may be provi<strong>de</strong>d by governm<strong>en</strong>tal organizations, NGOs or<br />

by the private sector. Formal care is usually provi<strong>de</strong>d by professionals (doctors, nurses,<br />

social workers) and auxiliaries, such as personal care workers .<br />

The Belgian el<strong>de</strong>rly care <strong>in</strong>frastructure comprises at-home care and community<br />

services, short-term and long-term resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care and hospital care. Long-term<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>s rest homes or homes for the el<strong>de</strong>rly d and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes e .<br />

A rest home (ROB) is <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed as one or more build<strong>in</strong>gs that functionally g<strong>en</strong>erate a<br />

collective resi<strong>de</strong>nce <strong>in</strong> which el<strong>de</strong>rly people live on a long-term basis. In the rest home,<br />

the usual family and household care is giv<strong>en</strong> completely or partly f . The legislator <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>es<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly people as people aged 60 years and ol<strong>de</strong>r. Younger people can be admitted only<br />

wh<strong>en</strong> approved <strong>in</strong> writ<strong>in</strong>g by the responsible authority. Rest homes offer a home-<br />

b See http://www.formularium.be/nl/formularium/frameset.htm for more <strong>in</strong>formation.<br />

c All results <strong>in</strong> section 1.2 were calculated us<strong>in</strong>g adm<strong>in</strong>istrative databases ma<strong>de</strong> available by<br />

RIZIV/INAMI (National Institute for Sickness and Invalidity Insurance), unless m<strong>en</strong>tioned otherwise. A<br />

<strong>de</strong>scription of the data and record-l<strong>in</strong>kage are provi<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> the technical note <strong>in</strong> App<strong>en</strong>dix 1.<br />

d Rusthuis (ROB) <strong>in</strong> Dutch, Maison <strong>de</strong> repos pour personnes âgées (MRPA) <strong>in</strong> Fr<strong>en</strong>ch.<br />

e Rust- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuis (RVT) <strong>in</strong> Dutch, Maison <strong>de</strong> repos et <strong>de</strong> so<strong>in</strong>s (MRS) <strong>in</strong> Fr<strong>en</strong>ch.<br />

f Article 2, $6 of the Decree of the Flemish Governm<strong>en</strong>t of December 18, 1991. Article 2 of the<br />

Decree of the Fr<strong>en</strong>ch Region of June 5, 1997.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 5<br />

replac<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong>vironm<strong>en</strong>t wh<strong>en</strong> possibilities for long-term care at home or short-term<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care are not suffici<strong>en</strong>t anymore.<br />

Medical characteristics of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts differ<strong>en</strong>tiate rest homes from nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.<br />

Nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (or beds) are <strong>de</strong>signed for pati<strong>en</strong>ts with long-term care needs, who are<br />

heavily <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt on the help of others for the activities of daily liv<strong>in</strong>g. Eligibility for<br />

admission to a nurs<strong>in</strong>g home rests on the follow<strong>in</strong>g criteria g 7, 8<br />

:<br />

1. The el<strong>de</strong>rly person has un<strong>de</strong>rgone all active and reactivat<strong>in</strong>g treatm<strong>en</strong>t but has not<br />

rega<strong>in</strong>ed full compet<strong>en</strong>cy <strong>in</strong> activities of daily liv<strong>in</strong>g (ADL). However, daily medical<br />

supervision or a specialized medical treatm<strong>en</strong>t is not necessary.<br />

2. All possibilities for at-home care have be<strong>en</strong> explored so that a nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

admission is nee<strong>de</strong>d.<br />

3. The g<strong>en</strong>eral health status of the el<strong>de</strong>rly person <strong>de</strong>mands, apart from medical care<br />

provi<strong>de</strong>d by a g<strong>en</strong>eral practitioner and nurs<strong>in</strong>g care, paramedical and/or<br />

physiotherapeutic care and help with activities of daily liv<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

4. The el<strong>de</strong>rly person has a <strong>de</strong>gree of care <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy equal to B or C (see<br />

section 1.2.2.1).<br />

Rest homes and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes can impose further criteria for admission. Some for<br />

example do not admit people suffer<strong>in</strong>g from <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia, while others exclusively admit<br />

people with a diagnosis of <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia. 7<br />

For placem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> both resi<strong>de</strong>ntial sett<strong>in</strong>gs, an assessm<strong>en</strong>t with multi-discipl<strong>in</strong>ary<br />

evaluation reports and standardized evaluation scales takes place (see section 1.2.2.1).<br />

The g<strong>en</strong>eral practitioner or the nurse (provid<strong>in</strong>g hospital or at-home care) fill <strong>in</strong> the<br />

evaluation scale. This assessm<strong>en</strong>t together with an evaluation of social conditions<br />

<strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>es eligibility for placem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> a rest or nurs<strong>in</strong>g home.<br />

The first nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes were created <strong>in</strong> 1982 with the explicit <strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong>tion to create an<br />

<strong>in</strong>termediary structure betwe<strong>en</strong> a rest home and a hospital. Nowadays nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

beds are <strong>in</strong> dist<strong>in</strong>ct parts of hospitals or rest homes. There is a merged system of rest<br />

home and nurs<strong>in</strong>g home, which means that the el<strong>de</strong>rly can move betwe<strong>en</strong> differ<strong>en</strong>t<br />

levels of care without leav<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>stitution.<br />

The Belgian mo<strong>de</strong>l of long-term resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care for the el<strong>de</strong>rly is rather unique. Rest<br />

and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes are not specialized <strong>in</strong> specific illnesses except for <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia- but<br />

accept resi<strong>de</strong>nts with differ<strong>en</strong>t medical problems. Moreover, resi<strong>de</strong>ntial homes for the<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly are spread all over the country. Nearly every municipality has its own rest or<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home. 9 Although many homes have wait<strong>in</strong>g lists, most el<strong>de</strong>rly have the<br />

opportunity to go to a home <strong>in</strong> the municipality they live or a neighbour<strong>in</strong>g municipality<br />

wh<strong>en</strong> mov<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>to a resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care home.<br />

Rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes are ma<strong>in</strong>ly run by community social services, by religious<br />

charities and to a more limited ext<strong>en</strong>t by private for-profit corporations.<br />

g Article N1 app<strong>en</strong>dix 1 of the Royal Decree of September 21, 2004.


6 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Term<strong>in</strong>ology<br />

In chapter 1 we use rest home to refer to that part of the <strong>in</strong>stitution or build<strong>in</strong>g with<br />

accredited rest beds (ROB-bed<strong>de</strong>n). A nurs<strong>in</strong>g home refers to the part with accredited<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g beds (RVT-bed<strong>de</strong>n).<br />

In chapters 2 and 3 we use nurs<strong>in</strong>g home for an <strong>in</strong>stitution with exclusively nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

beds or with rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g beds. In this way the term nurs<strong>in</strong>g home is used<br />

accord<strong>in</strong>g to the <strong>in</strong>ternational literature.<br />

1.2.1.1 The responsibilities of authorities for resi<strong>de</strong>ntial long-term care<br />

The responsibility for resi<strong>de</strong>ntial long-term care is shared betwe<strong>en</strong> the fe<strong>de</strong>ral and<br />

regional authorities h .<br />

The Fe<strong>de</strong>ral M<strong>in</strong>ister of Social Affairs and Public Health <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>es the plann<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

accreditation criteria for the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and the daily lump sum i allocated by<br />

RIZIV/INAMI to rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. The Fe<strong>de</strong>ral M<strong>in</strong>ister of Economy, Energy,<br />

Foreign Tra<strong>de</strong> and Sci<strong>en</strong>ce Policy fixes the price for hotel (accommodation) services to<br />

be paid by the resi<strong>de</strong>nt (see section 1.2.2.2).<br />

The plann<strong>in</strong>g and accreditation criteria for the rest homes are <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>ed by the<br />

communities (Flemish, Fr<strong>en</strong>ch and German-speak<strong>in</strong>g communities).<br />

The distribution of responsibilities betwe<strong>en</strong> the differ<strong>en</strong>t authorities is complicated.<br />

However, s<strong>in</strong>ce 1997 three protocol agreem<strong>en</strong>ts (1997, 2003 and 2005) betwe<strong>en</strong> the<br />

fe<strong>de</strong>ral governm<strong>en</strong>t and the communities have formulated common objectives of el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

care. These agreem<strong>en</strong>ts allow each authority to flesh out the common objectives<br />

autonomously accord<strong>in</strong>g to the local <strong>de</strong>mographic needs.<br />

1.2.1.2 Number of <strong>in</strong>stitutions<br />

There were 1,678 rest homes (ROB) and 1,015 nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (RVT) with at least one<br />

bed on December 31, 2004. In a majority of the cases, an <strong>in</strong>stitution comprised both a<br />

rest home and a nurs<strong>in</strong>g home. In this way, 970 rest homes and 970 nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

were each part of a s<strong>in</strong>gle <strong>in</strong>stitution. In other words, 708 rest homes and 45 nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

were s<strong>in</strong>gle <strong>en</strong>tities. The geographical distribution by prov<strong>in</strong>ce is shown <strong>in</strong> table 1.1.<br />

Table 1.1 : Number of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial homes by type and prov<strong>in</strong>ce on<br />

December 31, 2004<br />

Prov<strong>in</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> Flan<strong>de</strong>rs ROB 1 RVT 1 Total<br />

Antwerp<strong>en</strong> 197 162 359<br />

Vlaams-Brabant 116 83 199<br />

Limburg 74 55 129<br />

Oost-Vlaan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> 194 153 347<br />

West-Vlaan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> 163 150 313<br />

Prov<strong>in</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> Wallonia<br />

Ha<strong>in</strong>aut 294 117 411<br />

Liège 220 107 327<br />

Namur 102 41 143<br />

Brabant wallon 68 28 96<br />

Luxembourg 50 20 70<br />

Brussels - Capital Region<br />

Brussels - Capital Region 200 99 299<br />

1 ROB: rest home; RVT: nurs<strong>in</strong>g home; Source: RIZIV/INAMI<br />

h See App<strong>en</strong>dix 2 for more <strong>de</strong>tails on the responsibilities of the differ<strong>en</strong>t authorities for resi<strong>de</strong>ntial<br />

long-term care <strong>in</strong> Belgium. App<strong>en</strong>dix 2 also provi<strong>de</strong>s a <strong>de</strong>tailed overview of the data the rest and<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes have to report to the responsible authorities.<br />

i See section 1.2.2.1 for more <strong>de</strong>tails on the f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial long-term care.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 7<br />

1.2.1.3 Number of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial home beds<br />

On average, the distribution of number of beds for rest homes and for nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes is<br />

fairly similar (see table 1.2). About 25% of both rest homes and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes had<br />

approximately 30 beds or less on December 31, 2004, while about 25% had more than<br />

60 beds.<br />

Table 1.2 : Descriptive statistics of the number of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial home beds by<br />

type of home on December 31, 2004<br />

N M<strong>in</strong> Max Q1 Median Q3 Mean SD<br />

ROB 1,678 2 234 27 41 59 47.03 28.66<br />

RVT 1,015 1 347 25 37 58 46.73 28.91<br />

All 2,693 1 347 27 40 59 46.92 28.75<br />

Source: RIZIV/INAMI<br />

An age-stratified number of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial home beds by district suggests a larger pot<strong>en</strong>tial<br />

of beds <strong>in</strong> the Walloon region and the Brussels-Capital region compared to the Flemish<br />

region (see figure 1.1). This t<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy is more pronounced <strong>in</strong> the prov<strong>in</strong>ces of Limburg,<br />

Ha<strong>in</strong>aut, Liège and Vlaams-Brabant. Although figure 1.1 reveals substantial differ<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong><br />

the number of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial home beds with<strong>in</strong> one prov<strong>in</strong>ce and betwe<strong>en</strong> the prov<strong>in</strong>ces,<br />

the differ<strong>en</strong>ces betwe<strong>en</strong> the regions dom<strong>in</strong>ate the picture. These regional differ<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong><br />

resi<strong>de</strong>ntial home beds for the el<strong>de</strong>rly have to be compared with at-home care and<br />

community services and short-term resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care for the el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> the differ<strong>en</strong>t<br />

regions to get an overall picture of care <strong>in</strong>frastructure for the el<strong>de</strong>rly. A typical example<br />

is the prov<strong>in</strong>ce of Limburg. While the number of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial home beds per 100,000<br />

<strong>in</strong>habitants over 50 years is among the lowest <strong>in</strong> Limburg, the number of el<strong>de</strong>rly mak<strong>in</strong>g<br />

use of at-home care services is substantially larger than <strong>in</strong> the rest of Flan<strong>de</strong>rs. 2


8 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Figure 1.1 : Number of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial home beds per 100,000 <strong>in</strong>habitants over<br />

50 years of age by district (2005)<br />

Source: RIZIV/INAMI (number of beds on December 31, 2004); FOD Economie - Algem<strong>en</strong>e<br />

Directie Statistiek <strong>en</strong> Economische Informatie, Di<strong>en</strong>st Demografie (population on January 1, 2005)<br />

1.2.1.4 Number of pati<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

The distribution by age and by g<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r <strong>in</strong>dicates that el<strong>de</strong>rly rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts are predom<strong>in</strong>antly wom<strong>en</strong> above 80 years of age (table 1.3 j ). More than<br />

75 perc<strong>en</strong>t of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly are wom<strong>en</strong>. There are some strik<strong>in</strong>g differ<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> the<br />

age distribution betwe<strong>en</strong> m<strong>en</strong> and wom<strong>en</strong>. B<strong>en</strong>eath the age of 80, the perc<strong>en</strong>tage of<br />

m<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes is larger than that of wom<strong>en</strong>. Above the age of 80 the<br />

opposite is true. This means that wh<strong>en</strong> abstract<strong>in</strong>g from the total number of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial<br />

m<strong>en</strong> and wom<strong>en</strong>, the male population is relatively younger than the female resi<strong>de</strong>ntial<br />

population. About 51 perc<strong>en</strong>t of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly wom<strong>en</strong> are above the age of 85,<br />

while this is only the case for about 33 perc<strong>en</strong>t of m<strong>en</strong> k .<br />

j The results <strong>in</strong> table 1.3 were calculated us<strong>in</strong>g an adm<strong>in</strong>istrative database ma<strong>de</strong> available by IMA<br />

(Intermutualistisch Ag<strong>en</strong>tschap- Ag<strong>en</strong>ce Intermutualiste - Intermutualistic Ag<strong>en</strong>cy). IMA is a non-profit<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitution with all Belgian sickness funds as its members. A <strong>de</strong>scription of the selection of pati<strong>en</strong>ts is<br />

provi<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> the technical note <strong>in</strong> App<strong>en</strong>dix 3.<br />

k In Pacolet et al. 2004-p208 2 the number of long-term resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly is substantially lower than <strong>in</strong><br />

table 1.3. In the former study the number of resi<strong>de</strong>nts is a picture on June 30 of each year, while <strong>in</strong><br />

table 1.3 all resi<strong>de</strong>nts for whom a rest or nurs<strong>in</strong>g home received a lump sum from RIZIV/INAMI (see<br />

section 1.2.2.1) dur<strong>in</strong>g the year 2004 are <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 9<br />

Table 1.3 : Age and g<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r distribution of el<strong>de</strong>rly resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> rest and<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (2004)<br />

Age groups Total % Wom<strong>en</strong> % M<strong>en</strong> %<br />

Age 95+ 10,227 6.8 8,948 7.9 1,279 3.5<br />

Age 90-94 28,784 19.2 24,009 21.3 4,775 12.9<br />

Age 85-89 30,435 20.3 24,430 21.6 6,005 16.2<br />

Age 80-84 38,661 25.8 29,398 26.0 9,263 25.0<br />

Age 75-79 20,849 13.9 14,732 13.0 6,117 16.5<br />

Age 70-74 9,916 6.6 6,066 5.4 3,850 10.4<br />

Age 65-69 4,902 3.3 2,579 2.3 2,323 6.3<br />

Age 60-64 2,574 1.7 1,213 1.1 1,361 3.7<br />

Age 55-59 1,726 1.2 761 0.7 965 2.6<br />

Age 50-54 983 0.7 413 0.4 570 1.5<br />

Age


10 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

1.2.2.1 Cost for RIZIV/INAMI o<br />

The care costs are f<strong>in</strong>anced by the public health <strong>in</strong>surance scheme through an <strong>en</strong>velope<br />

fund<strong>in</strong>g mechanism. A pre-set per diem paym<strong>en</strong>t rate is allocated to rest homes and<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes by RIZIV/INAMI for each b<strong>en</strong>eficiary p <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g on the care <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy<br />

of the b<strong>en</strong>eficiaries.<br />

The <strong>de</strong>gree of care <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy is assessed accord<strong>in</strong>g to the Katz scale q . There are six<br />

categories of <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy with a higher care profile receiv<strong>in</strong>g a higher per diem (see<br />

table 1.5).<br />

Table 1.5 : Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy categories<br />

Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy Description<br />

category<br />

O Physically <strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt / no <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia.<br />

A Physically <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt for personal hygi<strong>en</strong>e or gett<strong>in</strong>g dressed; or physically<br />

<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt but disori<strong>en</strong>ted <strong>in</strong> time and space.<br />

B Physically <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt for personal hygi<strong>en</strong>e and gett<strong>in</strong>g dressed, and for transfer or<br />

bathroom visits; or physically <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt for personal hygi<strong>en</strong>e and gett<strong>in</strong>g dressed<br />

and disori<strong>en</strong>ted <strong>in</strong> time and space.<br />

C Physically <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt for personal hygi<strong>en</strong>e and gett<strong>in</strong>g dressed, and for transfer and<br />

bathroom visits, and to eat or because of <strong>in</strong>cont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>ce.<br />

Cd C plus disori<strong>en</strong>ted <strong>in</strong> time and space.<br />

Cc In a persist<strong>en</strong>t vegetative state caused by an acute bra<strong>in</strong> trauma followed by a<br />

coma.<br />

Source: art. 151 of Royal Decree dated July 3, 1996 on <strong>rust</strong>oor<strong>de</strong>n voor bejaar<strong>de</strong>n, <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> c<strong>en</strong>tra voor dagverzorg<strong>in</strong>g (homes for the aged, nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, and day<br />

care c<strong>en</strong>tres); RIZIV circular 1307/AVB/omz-ROB-RVT2004/4 to the homes for the aged and<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes dated November 18, 2004.; art. 148 of Royal Decree dated July 3, 1996 on<br />

uitvoer<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> wet betreff<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> <strong>de</strong> verplichte verzeker<strong>in</strong>g voor g<strong>en</strong>eeskundige verzorg<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong><br />

uitker<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> (execution of the law concern<strong>in</strong>g the compulsory <strong>in</strong>surance on health care and<br />

b<strong>en</strong>efits).<br />

Before January 1, 2004 a rest or nurs<strong>in</strong>g home received a daily lump sum differ<strong>en</strong>tiated<br />

along the <strong>de</strong>gree of <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy of the b<strong>en</strong>eficiary. The new f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g scheme allocates<br />

an average daily lump sum per b<strong>en</strong>eficiary <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g on the overall <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy rate of<br />

the <strong>in</strong>stitution. The lump sum covers care provi<strong>de</strong>d by nurses and caregivers, speech<br />

therapy, assistance <strong>in</strong> activities of daily liv<strong>in</strong>g, activities of reactivation and social<br />

<strong>in</strong>tegration <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g occupational therapy, care material r and staff tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> palliative<br />

care. In nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes the daily lump sum also covers the physical therapist and the<br />

activities of the medical coord<strong>in</strong>ator.<br />

S<strong>in</strong>ce January 1, 2004 the number of <strong>in</strong>voiced days for a cal<strong>en</strong>dar year (t+2) is based on<br />

a quota of days calculated dur<strong>in</strong>g a refer<strong>en</strong>ce period (from July 1, year t until June 30,<br />

year t+1). This quota is equal to the sum of the number of days of the b<strong>en</strong>eficiaries<br />

charged to their sickness fund and the actual number of days of the other resi<strong>de</strong>nts.<br />

This total is raised by 3 perc<strong>en</strong>t to meet an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the occupancy rate dur<strong>in</strong>g the<br />

o<br />

We <strong>de</strong>scribe the f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g system <strong>in</strong>to force s<strong>in</strong>ce January 1, 2004. A <strong>de</strong>tailed <strong>de</strong>scription of the new<br />

f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g scheme can be found at RIZIV (2004). 10<br />

p<br />

A b<strong>en</strong>eficiary is a resi<strong>de</strong>nt of a rest or nurs<strong>in</strong>g home whose care costs are f<strong>in</strong>anced by the per diem<br />

paym<strong>en</strong>t. S<strong>in</strong>ce the f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g of rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes is part of the compulsory health <strong>in</strong>surance<br />

system, it applies only to persons covered by this system. Some resi<strong>de</strong>nts are not covered by the<br />

compulsory health <strong>in</strong>surance system for the care costs <strong>in</strong> a rest home (self-employed without a<br />

voluntary <strong>in</strong>surance for their m<strong>in</strong>or risks) or <strong>in</strong> a rest home and nurs<strong>in</strong>g home (some foreign<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts).<br />

q<br />

S<strong>in</strong>ce January 1, 2005 M<strong>in</strong>i M<strong>en</strong>tal State Exam<strong>in</strong>ation (MMSE) scores can be used to complete the<br />

Katz scores for persons disori<strong>en</strong>ted <strong>in</strong> time and space.<br />

r<br />

As <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed by article 147, $$ 1 and 2 of the Royal Decree of July 3, 1996.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 11<br />

refer<strong>en</strong>ce period. The f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g system also provi<strong>de</strong>s a partial contribution for days<br />

exceed<strong>in</strong>g the quota.<br />

Most <strong>in</strong>voiced days per resi<strong>de</strong>ntial home bed <strong>in</strong> the last quarter of 2004 fall <strong>in</strong>to<br />

<strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy categories O and A for rest homes and <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy categories Cd for<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (see figure 1.2). Figure 1.2 must not be <strong>in</strong>terpreted as <strong>de</strong>pict<strong>in</strong>g the use<br />

of available bed capacity because the number of beds repres<strong>en</strong>ts a snapshot on<br />

December, 31 2004 and does not reflect changes <strong>in</strong> the number of beds dur<strong>in</strong>g the last<br />

quarter of 2004. Invoiced days were divi<strong>de</strong>d by the number of beds only to correct for<br />

the size of the homes. Due to the legal <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ition of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, there are no<br />

<strong>in</strong>voiced days <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy categories O and A. Similarly, there are no <strong>in</strong>voiced days <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy category Cc for rest homes.<br />

Figure 1.2 : Number of <strong>in</strong>voiced days of resi<strong>de</strong>nts divi<strong>de</strong>d by total number of<br />

beds per home <strong>in</strong> function of <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy and type of home (ROB: rest<br />

home, RVT: nurs<strong>in</strong>g home).<br />

Source: RIZIV/INAMI<br />

In g<strong>en</strong>eral, the large majority of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> rest homes and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes are<br />

b<strong>en</strong>eficiaries. A marked differ<strong>en</strong>ce betwe<strong>en</strong> b<strong>en</strong>eficiaries and non-b<strong>en</strong>eficiaries is found<br />

for the distributions of <strong>in</strong>voiced days per resi<strong>de</strong>ntial home bed for all <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy<br />

categories except O, A, and Cc. The results suggest that most homes have little or no<br />

<strong>in</strong>voiced days per resi<strong>de</strong>ntial home bed of non-b<strong>en</strong>eficiaries <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy categories B,<br />

C, and Cd.


12 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

1.2.2.2 Private sp<strong>en</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g of resi<strong>de</strong>nts for non-medical care<br />

The rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g costs, ma<strong>in</strong>ly for hotel services, are met by the resi<strong>de</strong>nts s . These costs<br />

<strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> food, adm<strong>in</strong>istration and ma<strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong>ance costs. They do not <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong>d on the<br />

<strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy category of the resi<strong>de</strong>nt. The Fe<strong>de</strong>ral M<strong>in</strong>ister of Economy, Energy, Foreign<br />

Tra<strong>de</strong> and Sci<strong>en</strong>ce Policy fixes the price for hotel services to be paid by the resi<strong>de</strong>nt t .<br />

Table 1.6 learns that the daily price resi<strong>de</strong>nts of rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes have to pay for<br />

hotel services differs substantially betwe<strong>en</strong> and with<strong>in</strong> prov<strong>in</strong>ces. However, s<strong>in</strong>ce the<br />

daily price is not an all-<strong>in</strong> price we should be cautious wh<strong>en</strong> compar<strong>in</strong>g the daily prices<br />

betwe<strong>en</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial homes for the el<strong>de</strong>rly. On top of the daily price homes may ask<br />

supplem<strong>en</strong>ts or advances on behalf of a third party u . In the agreem<strong>en</strong>t betwe<strong>en</strong> the rest<br />

or nurs<strong>in</strong>g home and the resi<strong>de</strong>nt the items <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> the daily price and a list of extra<br />

charges must be explicitly m<strong>en</strong>tioned.<br />

Table 1.6 : Daily price (<strong>in</strong> ) for hotel services <strong>in</strong> a s<strong>in</strong>gle room <strong>in</strong> rest and<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes by prov<strong>in</strong>ce (2 nd semester of 2005)<br />

Prov<strong>in</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> Flan<strong>de</strong>rs Mean M<strong>in</strong> Max<br />

Antwerp<strong>en</strong> 42.6 24.5 86.8<br />

Vlaams-Brabant 37.5 21.2 73.0<br />

Limburg 37.1 25.4 66.0<br />

Oost-Vlaan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> 37.6 18.0 125.0<br />

West-Vlaan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> 36.8 22.3 74.9<br />

Prov<strong>in</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> Wallonia<br />

Ha<strong>in</strong>aut 31.3 18.0 75.4<br />

Liège 31.0 16.3 76.0<br />

Namur 30.3 18.8 75.5<br />

Brabant wallon 37.5 18.8 86.1<br />

Luxembourg 32.1 19.8 73.2<br />

Brussels - Capital Region<br />

Brussels - Capital Region 37.2 16.7 134.7<br />

Source: M<strong>in</strong>isterie van Economische Zak<strong>en</strong>, af<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g prijz<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> me<strong>de</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g<br />

1.2.3 Staff<br />

On October 1, 2001 a long-term care <strong>in</strong>surance scheme was <strong>in</strong>troduced <strong>in</strong> Flan<strong>de</strong>rs to<br />

comp<strong>en</strong>sate for some of the costs of non-medical care that emerge wh<strong>en</strong> people<br />

become aged or disabled. S<strong>in</strong>ce July 1, 2006 all resi<strong>de</strong>nts of an accredited rest or nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home receive a monthly lump sum of 125.<br />

The regulation of staff<strong>in</strong>g requirem<strong>en</strong>ts was not changed un<strong>de</strong>r the new f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g<br />

scheme <strong>in</strong> effect from January 1, 2004. All staff<strong>in</strong>g standards are expressed as 1 FTE for<br />

each 30 b<strong>en</strong>eficiaries. The distribution is giv<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> table 1.7.<br />

s<br />

F<strong>in</strong>ancial aid from the public municipal welfare c<strong>en</strong>tres (OCMW <strong>in</strong> Dutch, CPAS <strong>in</strong> Fr<strong>en</strong>ch) or from<br />

the family of the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is possible.<br />

t<br />

M<strong>in</strong>isterial Decree of August 12, 2005.<br />

u<br />

Voorschott<strong>en</strong> t<strong>en</strong> gunste van <strong>de</strong>r<strong>de</strong>n <strong>in</strong> Dutch, avances <strong>en</strong> faveur <strong>de</strong> tiers <strong>in</strong> Fr<strong>en</strong>ch. Wh<strong>en</strong> services<br />

are provi<strong>de</strong>d by third parties, the rest or nurs<strong>in</strong>g home first pays the third party and claims back the<br />

costs from the resi<strong>de</strong>nt afterwards.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 13<br />

Table 1.7 : Staff<strong>in</strong>g standards <strong>in</strong> rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, by type,<br />

occupational group and <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy category (<strong>in</strong> FTE/30 b<strong>en</strong>eficiaries)<br />

Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy category Occupational group ROB RVT<br />

O Nurse 0.25 Not relevant<br />

A Nurse<br />

1.20<br />

Not relevant<br />

Caregiver<br />

0.80<br />

Not relevant<br />

B Nurse<br />

2.10<br />

5.00<br />

Caregiver<br />

4.00<br />

5.00<br />

Reactivat<strong>in</strong>g personnel<br />

0.35<br />

Not relevant<br />

Physical therapist/speech<br />

therapist/occupational therapist<br />

Not relevant 1.00<br />

C Nurse<br />

4.10<br />

5.00<br />

Caregiver<br />

5.06<br />

6.00<br />

Reactivat<strong>in</strong>g personnel<br />

0.385<br />

0.50<br />

Physical therapist/speech<br />

therapist/occupational therapist<br />

Not relevant 1.00<br />

Cd Nurse<br />

4.10<br />

5.00<br />

Caregiver<br />

6.06<br />

6.50<br />

Reactivat<strong>in</strong>g personnel<br />

0.385<br />

0.50<br />

Physical therapist/speech<br />

therapist/occupational therapist<br />

Not relevant 1.00<br />

Source: RIZIV/INAMI<br />

The differ<strong>en</strong>ce betwe<strong>en</strong> the actual number and the subsidized number of differ<strong>en</strong>t<br />

categories of staff is paid by the rest or nurs<strong>in</strong>g home.<br />

Figure 1.3 shows the distribution of staff <strong>in</strong> FTE per bed and occupational group v .<br />

Caregivers, other staff below level A2 and nurses comprise the largest occupational<br />

groups <strong>in</strong> rest homes and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes w . The variation with<strong>in</strong> each occupational group<br />

is due to the way rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g home staff is f<strong>in</strong>anced. Not only the number of<br />

b<strong>en</strong>eficiaries, but also their care need is tak<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>to account.<br />

v The occupational groups <strong>in</strong> figure 1.3 can be classified accord<strong>in</strong>g to the groups <strong>in</strong> table 1.3. Nurse =<br />

nurse A1, nurse A2 and hospital assistant; other personnel A2, other personnel A1/univ. and other<br />

personnel


14 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Figure 1.3 : Distribution of staff <strong>in</strong> FTE per resi<strong>de</strong>ntial home bed and<br />

occupational group <strong>in</strong> the last quarter of 2004<br />

Source: RIZIV/INAMI<br />

Wh<strong>en</strong> compar<strong>in</strong>g the number of <strong>in</strong>voiced days per resi<strong>de</strong>ntial home aga<strong>in</strong>st the FTE per<br />

home by occupational group, we found that for most occupational groups, the more<br />

days were <strong>in</strong>voiced per home, the larger the amount of FTE per home (see figure 1.3).<br />

Giv<strong>en</strong> that more <strong>in</strong>voiced days g<strong>en</strong>erally correspon<strong>de</strong>d to a larger home and h<strong>en</strong>ce to<br />

more available staff, this f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g seemed fairly obvious but for two reasons. Firstly,<br />

speech therapists, reactivat<strong>in</strong>g personnel, and to a lesser ext<strong>en</strong>t other personnel level<br />

A2, were exceptions. That is, a larger number of <strong>in</strong>voiced days did not necessarily<br />

correspond with more FTE and vice versa. Secondly, the relation betwe<strong>en</strong> FTE and<br />

number of <strong>in</strong>voiced days was far from perfectly l<strong>in</strong>ear as evi<strong>de</strong>nced by figure 1.3. An<br />

explanation for both ph<strong>en</strong>om<strong>en</strong>a might be the governm<strong>en</strong>tal f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g of staff <strong>in</strong> homes.<br />

Not only the number of pati<strong>en</strong>ts but also the need for care of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts is tak<strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>to account <strong>in</strong> the attribution of the amount of FTE per home x . However, a more<br />

ext<strong>en</strong>sive exploration of this topic is beyond the scope of this report.<br />

x M<strong>in</strong>isterial or<strong>de</strong>r of 6 November 2003: vaststell<strong>in</strong>g van het bedrag <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> voorwaar<strong>de</strong>n voor <strong>de</strong><br />

toek<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> tegemoetkom<strong>in</strong>g, bedoeld <strong>in</strong> artikel 37, § 12, van <strong>de</strong> wet betreff<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> <strong>de</strong> verplichte<br />

verzeker<strong>in</strong>g voor g<strong>en</strong>eeskundige verzorg<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>en</strong> uitker<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>, gecoörd<strong>in</strong>eerd op 14 juli 1994, <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>rust</strong>oor<strong>de</strong>n<br />

voor bejaar<strong>de</strong>n ; <strong>en</strong>actm<strong>en</strong>t of the amount and conditions of the attribution for the comp<strong>en</strong>sation,<br />

<strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> art. 37, § 12 of the law regard<strong>in</strong>g the mandatory health <strong>in</strong>surance and remunerations,<br />

coord<strong>in</strong>ated on the 14 th of July 1994 <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and the rest homes


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 15<br />

Figure 1.3. Number of <strong>in</strong>voiced days for the last quarter of 2004 <strong>in</strong> function<br />

of FTE by occupational group. Each panel has differ<strong>en</strong>t scales.<br />

Source: RIZIV/INAMI<br />

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS<br />

The ma<strong>in</strong> objective of this study was to <strong>in</strong>vestigate the quality of medication prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial long-term care for the el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> Belgium and the relation with <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

characteristics, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g the quality of the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t systems. We<br />

translated this broad research question <strong>in</strong>to the follow<strong>in</strong>g specific questions.<br />

What is the magnitu<strong>de</strong> of medication use and exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for long-term resi<strong>de</strong>ntial<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> Belgium? The use and cost of medication <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly are hardly<br />

docum<strong>en</strong>ted <strong>in</strong> Belgium. We <strong>in</strong>vestigate the costs and use of prescribed medic<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong> all<br />

Belgian rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes <strong>in</strong> 2004 us<strong>in</strong>g a large adm<strong>in</strong>istrative database<br />

(Farmanet y ). In addition, we provi<strong>de</strong> <strong>de</strong>tailed <strong>in</strong>formation on the use and cost<br />

reimbursed and private- of prescribed and over-the-counter (OTC) medication <strong>in</strong> a<br />

selection of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.<br />

What are the medical needs of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly? An assessm<strong>en</strong>t of cl<strong>in</strong>ical needs of<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts is a prerequisite for any evaluation of the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

This assessm<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>s at least an evaluation of the resi<strong>de</strong>nt s risk profile and comorbidity.<br />

How can the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g to el<strong>de</strong>rly nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts be measured?<br />

Although many explicit, evi<strong>de</strong>nce-based criteria to assess the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g to<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts have be<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong>veloped and evaluated, <strong>de</strong>bate cont<strong>in</strong>ues<br />

regard<strong>in</strong>g which <strong>in</strong>dicators are most appropriate. Which (adapted) <strong>in</strong>dicators to<br />

measure prescrib<strong>in</strong>g medication are most suited <strong>in</strong> the Belgian geriatric context? Which<br />

y See RIZIV (2005) 11 for a <strong>de</strong>scription of the Farmanet database.


16 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

quality <strong>in</strong>dicator(s) should be recomm<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d to assist <strong>in</strong> monitor<strong>in</strong>g and improv<strong>in</strong>g the<br />

quality of care provi<strong>de</strong>d to resi<strong>de</strong>nts of Belgian nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes?<br />

What are the g<strong>en</strong>eral characteristics of medication managem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> Belgian nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes? We exam<strong>in</strong>e the provision of pharmaceutical services, the organization of the<br />

medication process and the implem<strong>en</strong>tation of a formulary.<br />

Which organizational characteristics are associated with the quality of medication use?<br />

We exam<strong>in</strong>e the ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the quality of medication use varies across<br />

characteristics associated with the organizational structure such as ownership, size,<br />

type, f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g (reimbursem<strong>en</strong>ts and private sp<strong>en</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g), nurse staff<strong>in</strong>g levels, case-mix<br />

and geographical locations.<br />

1.4 PREVIOUS STUDIES FOR BELGIUM<br />

Relatively few studies on the quality of medication use <strong>in</strong> Belgian rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

have be<strong>en</strong> carried out.<br />

In a rec<strong>en</strong>t study by the Christian Mutualities 12 the cost and quality of medication use by<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly z were analyzed. The study <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d a cohort of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

with no change <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy score <strong>in</strong> 2002, without a transfer from at-home care to<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care and who did not die dur<strong>in</strong>g 2002 and 2003 (n=5,123). For this cohort a<br />

follow-up of one year was possible <strong>in</strong> the period 2002-2003. For some of the results, a<br />

comparison was ma<strong>de</strong> betwe<strong>en</strong> rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts and a group of el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

receiv<strong>in</strong>g at-home care, selected on the basis of the same criteria (n=25.532). The data<br />

on medication prescription and cost are based on the Farmanet database, which only<br />

conta<strong>in</strong>s medication dispersed by community-based pharmacists.<br />

Table 1.8 shows the median cost of reimbursed medication for the health <strong>in</strong>surance<br />

(RIZIV/INAMI) and for the el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> a rest or nurs<strong>in</strong>g home or el<strong>de</strong>rly receiv<strong>in</strong>g athome<br />

care. In view of a comparison with the results of our study, we want to<br />

emphasize the specific study population <strong>in</strong> table 1.8.<br />

Table 1.8 : Cost of reimbursed medication for el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> rest or nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes and el<strong>de</strong>rly receiv<strong>in</strong>g at-home care<br />

Median medication costs ROB/RVT At-home care<br />

Reimbursem<strong>en</strong>ts by RIZIV/INAMI 480 538<br />

Co-paym<strong>en</strong>ts aa 115 121<br />

Total 606 672<br />

Source: Du Bois et al. 12<br />

In table 1.9 the medication use for resi<strong>de</strong>nts and el<strong>de</strong>rly receiv<strong>in</strong>g at-home care is<br />

compared for medication groups or medication for specific diseases which account for a<br />

relatively large part of the cost for RIZIV/INAMI. For some medication groups the<br />

perc<strong>en</strong>tages of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly and el<strong>de</strong>rly receiv<strong>in</strong>g at-home care show substantial<br />

differ<strong>en</strong>ces. However, cautious <strong>in</strong>terpretation of these differ<strong>en</strong>ces is crucial s<strong>in</strong>ce these<br />

perc<strong>en</strong>tages only reflect the use of medication without correct<strong>in</strong>g for differ<strong>en</strong>ces<br />

<strong>in</strong> (co-) morbidity betwe<strong>en</strong> the two populations.<br />

z Only members of the Alliance of Christian Sickness Funds were <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> the study. The results<br />

were confirmed by one of the authors (M Du Bois).<br />

aa Remgeld <strong>in</strong> Dutch, ticket modérateur <strong>in</strong> Fr<strong>en</strong>ch. A co-paym<strong>en</strong>t is a cost-shar<strong>in</strong>g arrangem<strong>en</strong>t which<br />

requires the <strong>in</strong>dividual covered to pay part of the cost of care. A co-paym<strong>en</strong>t is a fixed fee (flat rate)<br />

per item or service.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 17<br />

Table 1.9 : Medication use by el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> rest or nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

receiv<strong>in</strong>g at-home care, by medication group (% of el<strong>de</strong>rly)<br />

% of RIZIV/INAMI % of ROB/RVT % of el<strong>de</strong>rly with at-<br />

Medication group or disease cost<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

home care<br />

Diabetes 3.1 12 15<br />

Thrombosis 2.1 18 32<br />

Diuretics 1.1 36 36<br />

Corticosteroids 1.0 15 18<br />

Antibiotics for systematic use<br />

Anti-<strong>in</strong>flammatory and anti-<br />

1.1 47 57<br />

rheumatic medication<br />

1.1 27 48<br />

Psycho-analeptics 2.8 36 31<br />

Anti-asthmatics 2.0 14 18<br />

Source: Du Bois et al. 12<br />

With<strong>in</strong> the group of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly (perc<strong>en</strong>tages <strong>in</strong> the column ROB/RVT of<br />

table 1.9) medication use was not uniform across the country. Table 1.10 shows the<br />

regional variation. Contrary to table 1.1, the prov<strong>in</strong>ces of Vlaams-Brabant (Flan<strong>de</strong>rs),<br />

Brabant wallon and the Brussels Capital Region were tak<strong>en</strong> together as one prov<strong>in</strong>ce.<br />

Un<strong>de</strong>rstand<strong>in</strong>g regional variation <strong>in</strong> the use of medication is complex and is far beyond<br />

the scope of this <strong>in</strong>troductory chapter. Therefore we only po<strong>in</strong>t out some remarkable<br />

differ<strong>en</strong>ces or similarities <strong>in</strong> medication use betwe<strong>en</strong> prov<strong>in</strong>ces. The largest regional<br />

variation <strong>in</strong> medication use of el<strong>de</strong>rly resi<strong>de</strong>nts was found for psycho-analeptics with the<br />

largest perc<strong>en</strong>tage <strong>in</strong> the prov<strong>in</strong>ce of Namur (52%) and the smallest <strong>in</strong> Antwerp<strong>en</strong><br />

(38%). Antibiotics for systematic use had a similar pattern: 58% <strong>in</strong> Namur versus 38% <strong>in</strong><br />

Antwerp<strong>en</strong>. With<strong>in</strong> Flan<strong>de</strong>rs the prov<strong>in</strong>ce of Limburg shows the largest perc<strong>en</strong>tage of<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly resi<strong>de</strong>nts for most medication groups. In the Walloon region this is the case for<br />

Namur, followed by Liège.<br />

In 2005 a study was carried out by the Limburgs Universitair C<strong>en</strong>trum (LUC) bb <strong>in</strong> a<br />

sample of Belgian rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. 13 The c<strong>en</strong>tral research question was closely<br />

related to the key research question of the pres<strong>en</strong>t study, viz. an analysis of the<br />

medication policy of Belgian resi<strong>de</strong>ntial homes for the el<strong>de</strong>rly. A questionnaire was s<strong>en</strong>t<br />

to all Belgian rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (n=1,722). The response rate was 33.57%. In<br />

addition, 29 <strong>in</strong>terviews were conducted to complem<strong>en</strong>t the writt<strong>en</strong> questionnaire cc .<br />

The medication policy questionnaire and <strong>in</strong>terviews revealed <strong>in</strong>formation about the<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g, the purchase and stock of the medication, the formulary and cooperation.<br />

We only give some results, s<strong>in</strong>ce it is very difficult to <strong>de</strong>scribe a study and its results<br />

solely on the basis of pres<strong>en</strong>tation sli<strong>de</strong>s. Nearly 98% of prescriptions were writt<strong>en</strong> by<br />

the family doctor, the other 2% by the medical coord<strong>in</strong>ator. The dist<strong>in</strong>ction betwe<strong>en</strong><br />

prescription-bound and non prescription-bound medication <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>ed to a large<br />

ext<strong>en</strong>t if the medication was obta<strong>in</strong>ed from a community pharmacy, a hospital pharmacy<br />

or from a wholesaler or manufacturer. Most rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes purchased from<br />

only one pharmacy (69.5%), another 22.2% purchased its medication from multiple<br />

pharmacies <strong>in</strong> turn. Only 8.3% was serviced by multiple pharmacies at the same time.<br />

The most important criteria for choos<strong>in</strong>g a medication supplier were good service<br />

(73.5%), proximity (11.3%) and cost of medication (8.1%). Almost 72% of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes had a formulary (with large differ<strong>en</strong>ces betwe<strong>en</strong> the three regions), which was<br />

used by 30% of the family physicians. The usage <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d to a large ext<strong>en</strong>t on the<br />

orig<strong>in</strong> of the formulary (from the governm<strong>en</strong>t, own formulary, hospital formulary).<br />

bb S<strong>in</strong>ce June 2005 the LUC is called Universiteit Hasselt.<br />

cc There is no <strong>in</strong>formation whether the results are repres<strong>en</strong>tative for all Belgian rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes.


18 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

An ol<strong>de</strong>r study by Van<strong>de</strong>r Stichele et al. 14 <strong>in</strong>vestigated the medication use and<br />

knowledge of medication among resi<strong>de</strong>nts of a sample of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes <strong>in</strong> Flan<strong>de</strong>rs dd . In<br />

addition, the medication distribution and <strong>in</strong>formation activities <strong>in</strong>si<strong>de</strong> the homes were<br />

<strong>de</strong>scribed. The selection of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes was based on the selection of<br />

23 experi<strong>en</strong>ced nurses work<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> differ<strong>en</strong>t nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes but meet<strong>in</strong>g regularly for<br />

postgraduate tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g. In each of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes a random sample of t<strong>en</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

was tak<strong>en</strong>.<br />

The 23 nurses <strong>in</strong>terviewed the nurse responsible for the selected resi<strong>de</strong>nt and the<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt, if possible. Ev<strong>en</strong>tually 198 resi<strong>de</strong>nts (20 <strong>in</strong>stitutions) were <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> the<br />

study, 128 of them could be <strong>in</strong>terviewed directly. Although the average number of<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> the 20 <strong>in</strong>stitutions was somewhat larger than the Flemish average, the<br />

selected <strong>in</strong>stitutions were repres<strong>en</strong>tative for Flan<strong>de</strong>rs. The resi<strong>de</strong>nts had a mean of<br />

4.5 differ<strong>en</strong>t medic<strong>in</strong>es (range 0-12) on their medication chart. 4% did not take any<br />

medication, half of them because of therapeutic abst<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>ce <strong>in</strong> term<strong>in</strong>al care. 47% had at<br />

least 5 medic<strong>in</strong>es. The number of medic<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong>creased with age (3.7 to 4.8 medic<strong>in</strong>es<br />

betwe<strong>en</strong> the age of 60 and 79), but stabilized from the age of 80 onwards<br />

(4.3 medic<strong>in</strong>es). On average 19 differ<strong>en</strong>t GPs att<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d resi<strong>de</strong>nts.<br />

In Pitruzzella et al. 15 the medication use <strong>in</strong> rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes <strong>in</strong> the Walloon<br />

Region was analyzed for the year 2003 and compared with the results of a survey<br />

carried out <strong>in</strong> 1993. For a repres<strong>en</strong>tative sample of el<strong>de</strong>rly resi<strong>de</strong>nts (2,343 el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

resid<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> 37 differ<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>stitutions) the medication chart on a specific day<br />

(November 15, 2003) was analyzed. On that day a total of 16,808 medications or 7.19<br />

drugs per resi<strong>de</strong>nt were registered with large differ<strong>en</strong>ces betwe<strong>en</strong> the <strong>in</strong>stitutions<br />

(range of 5.9-8.7). In 1993 this was only 5.04. Almost 19% of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts received<br />

more than 10 drugs on one day, 19.4% received less than 5 drugs. Drugs related to the<br />

nervous system (n=5,410), the cardiovascular system (n=4,133), the gastro<strong>in</strong>test<strong>in</strong>al<br />

system (n=3,713) and blood and blood form<strong>in</strong>g organs (n=1,257) repres<strong>en</strong>ted the<br />

largest groups. Age, g<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r and the pres<strong>en</strong>ce of <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia were found to be expla<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

factors.<br />

dd As <strong>in</strong> chapters 2 and 3 we use the term nurs<strong>in</strong>g home for an <strong>in</strong>stitution with exclusively nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

beds or with rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g beds.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 19<br />

Table 1.10 : Medication use by el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> rest or nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, by medication group and by prov<strong>in</strong>ce (% of el<strong>de</strong>rly resi<strong>de</strong>nts)<br />

Medication group or disease Belgium Antwerp<strong>en</strong> Brabant Limburg Oost-Vl West-Vl Ha<strong>in</strong>aut Liège Namur Luxemb<br />

Diabetes 12 9 11 19 11 15 11 12 9 16<br />

Thrombosis 18 15 16 22 17 15 21 22 23 19<br />

Diuretics 36 32 33 27 36 37 29 40 40 42<br />

Corticosteroids 15 11 16 15 13 12 17 18 18 15<br />

Antibiotics for systematic use 47 38 47 51 43 48 53 54 58 42<br />

Anti-<strong>in</strong>flammatory and anti-rheumatic medication 27 21 25 33 27 26 28 34 28 26<br />

Psycho-analeptics 36 28 38 39 28 32 41 44 52 45<br />

Anti-asthmatics 14 11 13 17 11 12 19 18 18 15<br />

Source: Du Bois et al. 12


20 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

1.5 AGGREGATED DATA ON MEDICATION USE AND<br />

EXPENDITURES IN REST AND NURSING HOMES IN<br />

BELGIUM<br />

The Farmanet database conta<strong>in</strong>s prescriptions disp<strong>en</strong>sed from community-based<br />

pharmacies <strong>in</strong> Belgium. Prescriptions disp<strong>en</strong>sed from hospital pharmacies as well as<br />

exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for other categories of care can be obta<strong>in</strong>ed from the IMA-database with<br />

claims data on all exp<strong>en</strong>ditures categories. Both databases conta<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation on<br />

reimbursem<strong>en</strong>ts of RIZIV/INAMI and out-of-pocket paym<strong>en</strong>ts by the resi<strong>de</strong>nts for<br />

prescription medication.<br />

The pres<strong>en</strong>t study is the first to show national estimates of medication use and<br />

exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for el<strong>de</strong>rly resi<strong>de</strong>nts of rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes <strong>in</strong> Belgium. Section 1.5.1<br />

provi<strong>de</strong>s data on medication use by major drug classes. In the Anatomical Therapeutic<br />

Chemical (ATC) Classification System drugs are classified <strong>in</strong>to differ<strong>en</strong>t groups<br />

accord<strong>in</strong>g to the organ or system on which they act and their chemical, pharmacological<br />

and therapeutic properties. Drugs are divi<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong>to groups at 5 differ<strong>en</strong>t levels ee .<br />

Section 1.5.2 gives a g<strong>en</strong>eral overview of the exp<strong>en</strong>ditures of prescribed and reimbursed<br />

medication used by el<strong>de</strong>rly resi<strong>de</strong>nts of rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes for the year 2004. We<br />

calculated the exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for the health <strong>in</strong>surance reimbursed by RIZIV/INAMI as well<br />

as the out-of-pocket paym<strong>en</strong>ts for the resi<strong>de</strong>nts. Medic<strong>in</strong>es are reimbursed on a feefor-service<br />

basis <strong>in</strong> Belgium ff . The basis for reimbursem<strong>en</strong>t is classification with<strong>in</strong><br />

categories fixed by Royal Decree. The classification reflects the social importance of the<br />

drug, pharmacotherapeutic criteria and price criteria.<br />

For this population-based <strong>de</strong>scription of medication use <strong>in</strong> Belgian rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes, only the data of drugs sold by community pharmacists to these homes are tak<strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>to account. A m<strong>in</strong>or part of homes buy their drugs through hospital pharmacies. The<br />

hospital pharmacy data did not allow us to dist<strong>in</strong>guish <strong>in</strong> a reliable way betwe<strong>en</strong> the<br />

medication prescribed <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>pati<strong>en</strong>t or day case treatm<strong>en</strong>t from the medication <strong>de</strong>livered<br />

to the rest or nurs<strong>in</strong>g home of the resi<strong>de</strong>nt. Moreover, this latter category also conta<strong>in</strong>s<br />

the disp<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>g of some exp<strong>en</strong>sive drugs which is legally exclusively reserved for hospital<br />

pharmacies. This bias <strong>in</strong> our estimates will lead to a small un<strong>de</strong>restimation of global<br />

medication use. The utilization data are not expected to be <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ced by the retailer s<br />

circuit chos<strong>en</strong> by homes. To estimate the distribution of drug utilization, the Def<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

Daily Dose (DDD) is used as estimate for the ma<strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong>ance dose per day per drug used<br />

for its pr<strong>in</strong>cipal <strong>in</strong>dications <strong>in</strong> adults. In the Farmanet data, DDDs adapted to the<br />

Belgian situation are used gg . To calculate the overall exp<strong>en</strong>ditures of prescribed and<br />

reimbursed medication, we <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> the hospital pharmacy data.<br />

1.5.1 Use of medication by differ<strong>en</strong>t levels of ATC group<br />

The four ma<strong>in</strong> ATC1 classes of drug consumption <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly people liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> Belgian rest<br />

<strong>en</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes are related to the cardiovascular, nervous, gastro<strong>in</strong>test<strong>in</strong>al and<br />

respiratory system (figure 1.5). These four classes are <strong>de</strong>scribed <strong>in</strong> more <strong>de</strong>tail <strong>in</strong> this<br />

section. A l<strong>en</strong>gthy table conta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g the 100 most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly used drugs (ATC5) is<br />

pres<strong>en</strong>ted <strong>in</strong> App<strong>en</strong>dix 4 (table 4.1).<br />

ee<br />

See http://www.whocc.no/atcddd/ for more <strong>in</strong>formation.<br />

ff<br />

S<strong>in</strong>ce July 1, 2006 a large part of hospital drugs are f<strong>in</strong>anced on a lump sum basis replac<strong>in</strong>g the fee for<br />

service practice.<br />

gg<br />

See http://www.bcfi.be for more <strong>de</strong>tails.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 21<br />

Def<strong>in</strong>ed Daily Dose (DDD)<br />

70.000.000<br />

60.000.000<br />

50.000.000<br />

40.000.000<br />

30.000.000<br />

20.000.000<br />

10.000.000<br />

Figure 1.5 : Number of medication prescriptions <strong>in</strong> Belgian rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes, expressed <strong>in</strong> DDD for every ma<strong>in</strong> ATC class.<br />

0<br />

CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM<br />

NERVOUS SYSTEM<br />

ALIMENTARY TRACT AND METABOLISM<br />

RESPIRATORY SYSTEM<br />

BLOOD AND BLOOD FORMING ORGANS<br />

MUSCULO-SKELETAL SYSTEM<br />

SYSTEMIC HORMONAL PREPARATIONS, EXCL. SEX HORMONES AND INSULINS<br />

Source: Farmanet<br />

ANTIINFECTIVES FOR SYSTEMIC USE<br />

SENSORY ORGANS<br />

GENITO URINARY SYSTEM AND SEX HORMONES<br />

DERMATOLOGICALS<br />

VARIOUS<br />

ANTIPARASITIC PRODUCTS, INSECTICIDES AND REPELLENTS<br />

ANTINEOPLASTIC AND IMMUNOMODULATING AGENTS<br />

In the drug class related to the cardiovascular system, molsidom<strong>in</strong>e - a drug to treat<br />

ang<strong>in</strong>a - is most oft<strong>en</strong> prescribed (see App<strong>en</strong>dix 4 - table 4.2 for more <strong>de</strong>tails). ACE<strong>in</strong>hibitors,<br />

drugs used <strong>in</strong> the treatm<strong>en</strong>t of heart failure and hypert<strong>en</strong>sion, are also wi<strong>de</strong>ly<br />

used. Angiot<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong> II antagonists, a more rec<strong>en</strong>t antihypert<strong>en</strong>sive drug class, constitute<br />

28% of the amount of ACE-<strong>in</strong>hibitors prescribed. This ratio is an un<strong>de</strong>restimate, s<strong>in</strong>ce<br />

part of ACE-<strong>in</strong>hibitor prescription will be done to treat heart failure or <strong>in</strong> the post<br />

myocardial <strong>in</strong>farction sett<strong>in</strong>g. Amlodip<strong>in</strong>e, an antihypert<strong>en</strong>sive drug from the Caantagonist<br />

s class, compared to other classes such as ACE-<strong>in</strong>hibitors, ATII antagonists<br />

and antihypert<strong>en</strong>sive diuretics, accounts for about 1/3 of all prescriptions. Class III antiarrhythmics<br />

such as amiodarone and sotalol are wi<strong>de</strong>ly prescribed <strong>in</strong> this population.<br />

Compared to the class of selective beta-blockers, used as secondary prev<strong>en</strong>tion<br />

treatm<strong>en</strong>t for post-ischemic heart disease, heart failure, ang<strong>in</strong>a pectoris and atrial<br />

fibrillation, all largely preval<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> this population, it repres<strong>en</strong>ts 64%. Class I antiarrhythmics<br />

such as propaf<strong>en</strong>on and fleca<strong>in</strong>i<strong>de</strong> are still used for chronic treatm<strong>en</strong>t.<br />

Simvastat<strong>in</strong> and atorvastat<strong>in</strong> are the most popular drugs to lower cholesterol and are<br />

used to the same ext<strong>en</strong>t as the selective beta-blockers.<br />

In the second ATC1 class, the nervous system, it should be stressed that the nonreimbursed<br />

b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es are not pres<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> the Farmanet data. This second group is<br />

dom<strong>in</strong>ated by anti<strong>de</strong>pressants: 71% are selective seroton<strong>in</strong> reuptake <strong>in</strong>hibitors, 5%<br />

mono-am<strong>in</strong>e reuptake <strong>in</strong>hibitors and a large rest group of other molecules (see<br />

App<strong>en</strong>dix 4 - table 4.3 for more <strong>de</strong>tails). Of all anti<strong>de</strong>pressants used <strong>in</strong> this pati<strong>en</strong>t<br />

population, citalopram is the most prescribed (26%), followed by sertral<strong>in</strong>e (15%),<br />

escitalopram (13%), paroxet<strong>in</strong>e (12%) and trazodon (10%). Next, antipsychotics are the<br />

second largest group of prescribed drugs <strong>in</strong> this class. Risperidon is the most prescribed<br />

(31%), followed by olanzap<strong>in</strong> (27%). Of the ol<strong>de</strong>r antipsychotics, haloperidol is used<br />

most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly (12%). Betahist<strong>in</strong>e is still wi<strong>de</strong>ly used to treat vertigo and possibly<br />

M<strong>en</strong>ière s syndrome. In the class of the Alzheimer drugs, donepezil is used <strong>in</strong> over half<br />

of prescriptions of this k<strong>in</strong>d. Noteworthy is the fact that g<strong>in</strong>gko biloba is pres<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong><br />

0.5% of cases, probably also for this <strong>in</strong>dication.<br />

DDD


22 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

In the third ATC1 class, drugs for the gastro-<strong>in</strong>stest<strong>in</strong>al system, the largest group is the<br />

one with drugs to treat peptic disease (see App<strong>en</strong>dix 4 - table 4.4 for more <strong>de</strong>tails).<br />

Omeprazole, a proton pump <strong>in</strong>hibitor, is used <strong>in</strong> the majority of pati<strong>en</strong>ts. Ranitid<strong>in</strong>e, a<br />

drug of the ol<strong>de</strong>r H2-receptor blocker class, is still be<strong>in</strong>g used frequ<strong>en</strong>tly. The second<br />

largest group <strong>in</strong> this class consists of several oral antidiabetics that add up to a total of<br />

more than 3.6 million DDDs, compared to over 2 million for subcutaneous <strong>in</strong>sul<strong>in</strong>s.<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ations are likely, so this number only repres<strong>en</strong>ts market share and is not a<br />

proxy for the number of diabetic pati<strong>en</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> this population. Metform<strong>in</strong> is the most<br />

prescribed oral antidiabetic drug. Otil<strong>in</strong>ium is the most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly used spasmolytic<br />

drug, followed by mebever<strong>in</strong>e. For the laxatives, it should be stressed that the majority<br />

of them are not reimbursed by health <strong>in</strong>surance. Data <strong>in</strong> Farmanet are thus <strong>in</strong>complete.<br />

In the ATC1 class of drugs for the respiratory system, the mucolytics repres<strong>en</strong>t the<br />

largest group (see App<strong>en</strong>dix 4 - table 4.5 for more <strong>de</strong>tails). For the drugs most<br />

frequ<strong>en</strong>tly used for obstructive pulmonary disease COPD, the sympathomimetics make<br />

up the largest group of prescriptions. They are most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly used <strong>in</strong> comb<strong>in</strong>ation<br />

with <strong>in</strong>halation preparations <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g an antichol<strong>in</strong>ergic or corticosteroid. Tak<strong>en</strong><br />

together the pure formulations and the comb<strong>in</strong>ations, the long act<strong>in</strong>g beta-agonists<br />

constitute about 42% of this type of drug prescriptions. In the group of the H1antihistamics,<br />

levocetiriz<strong>in</strong>e has a market share of 30%.<br />

In the class of medication related to blood and blood form<strong>in</strong>g organs, the hepar<strong>in</strong>es are<br />

clearly head<strong>in</strong>g with more than 3.8 million DDDs. Enoxapar<strong>in</strong>e and nadropar<strong>in</strong>e have<br />

about an equal market share of 47% and 48% respectively. Next drug class are the<br />

thrombocytes aggregation <strong>in</strong>hibitors, with nearly 1.9 million DDDs of which clopidogrel<br />

repres<strong>en</strong>ts 79%.<br />

In the class of drugs for the musculoskeletal system the bifosfonates, used to treat<br />

osteoporosis, lead the group with nearly 1.5 million DDDs. However, all non-steroidal<br />

anti-<strong>in</strong>flammatory drugs together repres<strong>en</strong>t over 2.4 million DDDs. In g<strong>en</strong>eral they are<br />

used to treat osteoarthritis and rheumatic disor<strong>de</strong>rs. The Cox-2 <strong>in</strong>hibitors repres<strong>en</strong>ted<br />

about one fourth of all prescriptions <strong>in</strong> 2004. Virtually all paracetamol is sold over-thecounter<br />

without prescription, disabl<strong>in</strong>g an analysis of the use of analgetics and the<br />

pharmacological strategies used <strong>in</strong> this el<strong>de</strong>rly population.<br />

The most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly prescribed antibiotics for systemic use <strong>in</strong> rest <strong>en</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes is<br />

amoxicill<strong>in</strong> with a beta-lactamase <strong>en</strong>zyme <strong>in</strong>hibitor with over 750,000 DDDs. Both<br />

nitrofuranes together add up to nearly the same amount. The qu<strong>in</strong>olones account for<br />

over 470,000 DDDs annually, followed by second g<strong>en</strong>eration cephalospor<strong>in</strong>s<br />

(335,000 DDDs) and broad spectrum p<strong>en</strong>icill<strong>in</strong>s (278,000 DDDs). 99,000 <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>za<br />

vacc<strong>in</strong>es were reimbursed <strong>in</strong> 2004 <strong>in</strong> Belgian rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.<br />

In the class of the ant<strong>in</strong>eoplastic and immunomodulat<strong>in</strong>g ag<strong>en</strong>ts, tamoxif<strong>en</strong> used as<br />

adjuvant therapy for breast cancer is prescribed most (330,000 DDDs), closely followed<br />

by the gonadorel<strong>in</strong>e analogues mostly used for prostate cancer <strong>in</strong> this population with<br />

270,000 DDDs. In the group various , medic<strong>in</strong>al oxyg<strong>en</strong> takes up 82,000 DDDs.<br />

Regional variation <strong>in</strong> medication use based on DDD was consi<strong>de</strong>red for the top 10 of<br />

most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly used drug classes (ATC level 3). Furthermore, the drugs classes that<br />

were used for the rec<strong>en</strong>t feedbacks of the RIZIV/INAMI for antihypert<strong>en</strong>sive ag<strong>en</strong>ts and<br />

antibiotics prescribed <strong>in</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eral practice were assessed. This resulted <strong>in</strong> geographical<br />

variation distributions for the follow<strong>in</strong>g classes: anti<strong>de</strong>pressants and antipsychotica<br />

(psychopharmaca); ace <strong>in</strong>hibitors, angiot<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong> II antagonists, diuretics and potassiumspar<strong>in</strong>g<br />

ag<strong>en</strong>ts, and selective calcium channel blockers with ma<strong>in</strong>ly vascular effects<br />

(hypert<strong>en</strong>sives); beta-lactam antibacterials and p<strong>en</strong>icill<strong>in</strong>s, macroli<strong>de</strong>s, l<strong>in</strong>cosami<strong>de</strong>s,<br />

streptogram<strong>in</strong>s, and qu<strong>in</strong>olone antibacterials (antibiotics); drugs for peptic ulcer and<br />

gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, vasodilators used <strong>in</strong> cardiac diseases, antithrombotic<br />

ag<strong>en</strong>ts, high ceil<strong>in</strong>g diuretics, and beta block<strong>in</strong>g ag<strong>en</strong>ts (see App<strong>en</strong>dix 5 for the Belgian<br />

maps). We found a marked but differ<strong>en</strong>t regional variation for several medication<br />

groups. Appar<strong>en</strong>tly, no simple regional pattern across medication groups existed. For<br />

example, anti<strong>de</strong>pressants and selective calcium channel blockers were used to a larger<br />

ext<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> Walloon prov<strong>in</strong>ces compared to Flemish prov<strong>in</strong>ces, while the opposite was<br />

true for beta block<strong>in</strong>g ag<strong>en</strong>ts and diuretics and potassium-spar<strong>in</strong>g ag<strong>en</strong>ts. Several of


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 23<br />

these drugs can be used for differ<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>dications. S<strong>in</strong>ce we did not dispose of other<br />

variables like cl<strong>in</strong>ical pati<strong>en</strong>t characteristics per medication group it is <strong>in</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eral not<br />

warranted to <strong>in</strong>terpret these results towards an un<strong>de</strong>r- or overuse of these classes and<br />

h<strong>en</strong>ce to appraise the drug utilization quality. We thus ascerta<strong>in</strong> a clear regional<br />

variation but do not attempt to provi<strong>de</strong> an explanation for these variations <strong>in</strong> this part<br />

of the report (see section 1.6 - rationale for a field study).<br />

1.5.2 Exp<strong>en</strong>ditures of prescribed medic<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong> Belgian rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

In 2004 total exp<strong>en</strong>ditures on prescribed and reimbursed medication <strong>in</strong> Belgian rest and<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes amounted to almost 153 million of which 88% was disp<strong>en</strong>sed by the<br />

community pharmacy (table 1.11). As m<strong>en</strong>tioned before, total exp<strong>en</strong>ditures on<br />

medication disp<strong>en</strong>sed by the hospital pharmacy conta<strong>in</strong> medication prescribed <strong>in</strong> day<br />

case treatm<strong>en</strong>t and the medication <strong>de</strong>livered to the rest or nurs<strong>in</strong>g home of the<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g the disp<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>g of some exp<strong>en</strong>sive drugs.<br />

Our estimate of total exp<strong>en</strong>ditures on pharmaceutical specialties disp<strong>en</strong>sed by the<br />

community pharmacy ad<strong>de</strong>d up to more than 130 million of which 82% was paid by<br />

the health <strong>in</strong>surance and 18% out of pocket by the resi<strong>de</strong>nts hh . In addition, 2.8 million<br />

was sp<strong>en</strong>t on magistral preparations (of which 83% by the health <strong>in</strong>surance) and another<br />

1.46 million on special medical nutrition and wound material (of which 84% by the<br />

health <strong>in</strong>surance). In the rest of this section we focus on pharmaceutical specialties<br />

disp<strong>en</strong>sed by the community pharmacy and neglect magistral preparations or special<br />

medical nutrition and wound material as well as medication disp<strong>en</strong>sed by the hospital<br />

pharmacy.<br />

Table 1.11 : Exp<strong>en</strong>ditures on prescribed and reimbursed medication for<br />

health <strong>in</strong>surance and the resi<strong>de</strong>nt, by type of medication and disp<strong>en</strong>ser<br />

(2004)<br />

Disp<strong>en</strong>ser<br />

Type of<br />

medication<br />

Health <strong>in</strong>surance cost ( ) Out-of-pocket ( ) Total ( )<br />

Hospital pharmacy Specialties 16,368,403* 1,652,954 18,021,357<br />

Magistral<br />

preparations<br />

149,820 25,443 175,263<br />

Medical<br />

nutrition<br />

and wound<br />

material<br />

69,171 36,377 105,548<br />

Total 16,587,394 1,714,774 18,302,168<br />

Community pharmacy Specialties 106,839,205 23,516,627 130,355,832<br />

Magistral<br />

preparations<br />

2,335,892 479,138 2,815,030<br />

Medical<br />

nutrition<br />

and wound<br />

material<br />

1,235,698<br />

229,294 1,464,992<br />

Total 110,410,795 24,225,059 134,635,854<br />

Total 126,998,189 25,939,833 152,938,022<br />

* About 55% of this amount was prescribed <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>nts of rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes dur<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong>pati<strong>en</strong>t treatm<strong>en</strong>t. Source: IMA<br />

Anti<strong>de</strong>pressants, antipsychotics and antithrombotic ag<strong>en</strong>ts are rival<strong>in</strong>g for the highest<br />

health <strong>in</strong>surance cost (table 1.12). Together, the 10 most prescribed ATC3 classes<br />

amount to almost half of the total budget. However, the price of an <strong>in</strong>dividual drug is<br />

also a major <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>ant of the budgetary impact for health <strong>in</strong>surance (figure 1.6).<br />

Especially drugs used to prev<strong>en</strong>t or treat <strong>in</strong>fectious diseases repres<strong>en</strong>t a higher<br />

hh The data are not corrected for reimbursem<strong>en</strong>ts by the system of maximum bill<strong>in</strong>g (MaF).


24 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

<strong>in</strong>dividual cost: <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>za vacc<strong>in</strong>ation, several antibiotics and antimycotic drugs. In<br />

addition, several hormones, anti-Alzheimer drugs, anti-psychotics and opioids repres<strong>en</strong>t<br />

a relatively high <strong>in</strong>dividual cost.<br />

Table 1.12 : DDD and exp<strong>en</strong>ditures by ATC-class (2004)<br />

ATC Class or non-proprietary name DDD<br />

Health<br />

<strong>in</strong>surance<br />

cost ( )<br />

Out-ofpocket<br />

( )<br />

1 N06A ANTIDEPRESSANTS 15,187,938 12,429,029 3,627,857<br />

2 N05A ANTIPSYCHOTICS 4,651,768 10,651,173 1,516,215<br />

3 B01A ANTITHROMBOTIC AGENTS 6,446,832 10,617,869 1,985,108<br />

4 A02B<br />

DRUGS FOR PEPTIC ULCER AND<br />

GASTRO-OESOPHAGEAL REFLUX<br />

DISEASE (GORD)<br />

VASODILATORS USED IN CARDIAC<br />

10,971,741 7,890,532 1,736,477<br />

5 C01D DISEASES 15,769,367 5,894,855 1,365,843<br />

6 N02A OPIOIDS 2,502,729 5,026,818 1,344,979<br />

7 N06D ANTI-DEMENTIA DRUGS<br />

DOPAMINERGIC AGENTS<br />

1,356,858 3,714,205 371,777<br />

8 N04B (PARKINSON)<br />

SELECTIVE CALCIUM CHANNEL<br />

2,529,695 3,363,585 639,078<br />

9 C08C BLOCKERS (HYPERTENSION) 6,722,495 3,355,252 805,498<br />

10 R03A SYMPATHICOMIMETICS (INHALANTS) 2,918,707 3,245,897 643,113<br />

Source: Farmanet<br />

Cost/DDD<br />

8.0<br />

7.0<br />

6.0<br />

5.0<br />

4.0<br />

3.0<br />

2.0<br />

1.0<br />

0.0<br />

Antimycotics for systemic use<br />

Figure 1.6 : Cost per DDD for health <strong>in</strong>surance for the most costly ATC3<br />

classes. Classes with less than 10,000 DDD were omitted. Influ<strong>en</strong>za<br />

vacc<strong>in</strong>ation with a DDD of 1 is not repres<strong>en</strong>ted <strong>in</strong> the graph. The class V03A<br />

is not repres<strong>en</strong>ted. It conta<strong>in</strong>s ma<strong>in</strong>ly oxyg<strong>en</strong> with a cost per DDD of 22.5 .<br />

Hormones and related ag<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

Anti-parathyroid hormones<br />

Macroli<strong>de</strong>s, l<strong>in</strong>cosami<strong>de</strong>s and streptogram<strong>in</strong>s<br />

Source: Farmanet<br />

Qu<strong>in</strong>olone antibacterials<br />

Immunosuppressive ag<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

Anti-<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia drugs<br />

Antipsychotics<br />

Opioids<br />

Other beta-lactam antibacterials<br />

Antifungals for systemic use<br />

Hormone antagonists and related ag<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

Antithrombotic ag<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

Dopam<strong>in</strong>ergic ag<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

Beta-lactam antibacterials, p<strong>en</strong>icill<strong>in</strong>s<br />

Adr<strong>en</strong>ergics, <strong>in</strong>halants<br />

Intest<strong>in</strong>al anti<strong>in</strong>flammatory ag<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

Drugs affect<strong>in</strong>g bone structure and m<strong>in</strong>eralization<br />

Antiepileptics


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 25<br />

To have some i<strong>de</strong>a about the share of medication <strong>in</strong> total health <strong>in</strong>surance exp<strong>en</strong>ditures<br />

for el<strong>de</strong>rly resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, we calculated the most important cost<br />

compon<strong>en</strong>ts for this population group. Health <strong>in</strong>surance exp<strong>en</strong>ditures on medication<br />

disp<strong>en</strong>sed by the community pharmacy accounted for about 6% of total RIZIV/INAMI<br />

reimbursem<strong>en</strong>ts for this population <strong>in</strong> 2004 (table 1.13).<br />

Table 1.13 : Health <strong>in</strong>surance cost of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly (2004)<br />

Type of cost Health <strong>in</strong>surance cost ( ) % of total cost<br />

Lump sum for ROB 702,021,473 39.6<br />

Lump sum for RVT 616,518,522 34.8<br />

GP consultations and visits 59,899,446 3.4<br />

Hospitalization 18,837,080 1.1<br />

Physiotherapy (ROB) 26,167,075 1.5<br />

Medication from community pharmacy 110,526,192 6.2<br />

Medication from hospital pharmacy 16,587,394 0.9<br />

Total 1,773,499,831 100.0<br />

Source: IMA<br />

1.6 RATIONALE FOR A FIELD STUDY<br />

Some of the research questions addressed <strong>in</strong> this report cannot be answered solely on<br />

the basis of the available adm<strong>in</strong>istrative datasets. Although Farmanet is a very rich<br />

database conta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>de</strong>tailed <strong>in</strong>formation on prescribed medication, some ess<strong>en</strong>tial<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation is miss<strong>in</strong>g. Firstly, <strong>in</strong> Farmanet only prescribed and reimbursable medication<br />

is <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d. Secondly, only medication of rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes serviced by a<br />

community pharmacy is <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d. Those serviced by the hospital pharmacy are not.<br />

Thirdly, Farmanet does not <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> diagnostic co<strong>de</strong>s provid<strong>in</strong>g possible explanations for<br />

prescription behavior. And fourthly, possible causal relationships betwe<strong>en</strong> the local<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutional sett<strong>in</strong>g and prescription behavior and other confound<strong>in</strong>g local more<br />

qualitative factors cannot be explored <strong>in</strong> claims data. Although a l<strong>in</strong>ked database<br />

consist<strong>in</strong>g of Farmanet and some datasets available at RIZIV/INAMI at the level of the<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitution (number of beds, number of resi<strong>de</strong>nts, number of <strong>in</strong>voiced days, number of<br />

staff) or available at IMA (medication disp<strong>en</strong>sed by the hospital pharmacy) would<br />

improve substantially the pot<strong>en</strong>tial to answer the research questions, some crucial<br />

lacuna would still rema<strong>in</strong>.<br />

To assess the quality of medication use of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial el<strong>de</strong>rly, reliable data at the level of<br />

the <strong>in</strong>stitution and at the level of the resi<strong>de</strong>nt are <strong>in</strong>disp<strong>en</strong>sable. A field study overcomes<br />

most of the limitations of the adm<strong>in</strong>istrative datasets.<br />

A questionnaire-based field study was carried out <strong>in</strong> a selection of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and<br />

their resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> three prov<strong>in</strong>ces. The selected sample of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes is not a<br />

random sample but follows the Rapid Assessm<strong>en</strong>t cluster method of the World Health<br />

Organization ii . The field study was complem<strong>en</strong>ted by some g<strong>en</strong>eral analyses on the<br />

exp<strong>en</strong>ditures and use of medication based on adm<strong>in</strong>istrative databases and by a review<br />

of the literature on the quality of medication use <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and the impact of<br />

organizational characteristics on the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g and the medication process.<br />

ii See section 3.3 for more <strong>de</strong>tails.


26 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Keypo<strong>in</strong>ts<br />

The Belgian mo<strong>de</strong>l of long-term resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care for the el<strong>de</strong>rly is rather<br />

unique. Rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes are not specialized <strong>in</strong> specific illnesses -<br />

except sometimes for <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia - but accept resi<strong>de</strong>nts with differ<strong>en</strong>t medical<br />

problems. Moreover, resi<strong>de</strong>ntial homes for the el<strong>de</strong>rly are spread all over<br />

the country.<br />

About 150,000 el<strong>de</strong>rly were resi<strong>de</strong>nt <strong>in</strong> a rest or nurs<strong>in</strong>g home <strong>in</strong> the course<br />

of 2004. More than 75% of them were wom<strong>en</strong>, 46% was ol<strong>de</strong>r than 85 years.<br />

Although some studies on the use of medication <strong>in</strong> Belgian nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

exist, little is published on the relation betwe<strong>en</strong> medication use and<br />

organizational characteristics and quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Total exp<strong>en</strong>ditures on pharmaceutical specialties disp<strong>en</strong>sed by community<br />

pharmacies ad<strong>de</strong>d up to more than 130 million of which 82% was paid by<br />

the health <strong>in</strong>surance and 18% out of pocket by the resi<strong>de</strong>nts (2004). Another<br />

18 million was disp<strong>en</strong>sed by hospital pharmacies.<br />

The four ma<strong>in</strong> ATC1 classes of drug consumption <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly people liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

Belgian rest <strong>en</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g facilities are cardiovascular, nervous, gastro<strong>in</strong>test<strong>in</strong>al<br />

and respiratory drugs. The group of drugs for the nervous system is largely<br />

dom<strong>in</strong>ated by anti<strong>de</strong>pressants.<br />

Although clear geographical variations exist for the prescription of several<br />

drug classes, no simple regional pattern across medication groups was found.<br />

Anti<strong>de</strong>pressants, antipsychotics and antithrombotic ag<strong>en</strong>ts are rival<strong>in</strong>g for<br />

the highest health <strong>in</strong>surance cost. Together, the 10 most prescribed ATC3<br />

classes amount to almost half of the total budget.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 27<br />

2 REVIEW OF THE INTERNATIONAL<br />

LITERATURE ON THE USE OF MEDICATION<br />

IN NURSING HOMES<br />

Authors: Charlotte Verrue, Marc Bauw<strong>en</strong>s, Robert Van<strong>de</strong>r Stichele<br />

2.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE LITERATURE REVIEW<br />

The aim of this review was to survey the curr<strong>en</strong>t literature on the use of medication <strong>in</strong><br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, with special focus on the impact of <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics (<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g<br />

medication managem<strong>en</strong>t systems) on the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

2.2 METHODS OF THE REVIEW<br />

A computerized literature search was carried out start<strong>in</strong>g with a search <strong>in</strong> Medl<strong>in</strong>e (US<br />

National Library of Medic<strong>in</strong>e), based on search profiles <strong>in</strong> Medical Subject Head<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

(MeSH). The search strategy is giv<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> App<strong>en</strong>dix 6.<br />

This review is a narrative review, not a systematic review. Its purpose was to provi<strong>de</strong> a<br />

broad overview of the subject, <strong>in</strong> preparation to the field study, to provi<strong>de</strong> the<br />

necessary elem<strong>en</strong>ts for construct<strong>in</strong>g questionnaires, and to review exist<strong>in</strong>g sets of<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>in</strong>dicators, pert<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>t to the sett<strong>in</strong>g of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. No attempts<br />

have be<strong>en</strong> ma<strong>de</strong> at formal data extraction for pool<strong>in</strong>g of data.<br />

In this review, we address the follow<strong>in</strong>g questions:<br />

1. Why are el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong>stitutionalized?<br />

2. What are the most preval<strong>en</strong>t functional and cl<strong>in</strong>ical problems among<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts?<br />

3. What are the most preval<strong>en</strong>t problems with regard to medication and<br />

how can the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g be assessed?<br />

4. Which <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics are important for the quality of<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g?<br />

5. What is the effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess of <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tions (medication managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

systems) with regard to the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes?<br />

For the assessm<strong>en</strong>t of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality, a <strong>de</strong>scription will be giv<strong>en</strong> of 5 sets of<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>in</strong>dicators:<br />

1. The <strong>in</strong>dicators of un<strong>de</strong>ruse of medication with<strong>in</strong> the ACOVE<br />

(Assess<strong>in</strong>g Care of Vulnerable El<strong>de</strong>rs) Quality Criteria<br />

2. The BEERS Criteria for pot<strong>en</strong>tially <strong>in</strong>appropriate medication use <strong>in</strong><br />

ol<strong>de</strong>r adults<br />

3. The BEDNURS Criteria for <strong>in</strong>appropriate medication use <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes<br />

4. The Medication Appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess In<strong>de</strong>x (MAI).<br />

5. UK Commission for Social Care Inspection National M<strong>in</strong>imum<br />

Standards on Medication Care Homes for Ol<strong>de</strong>r People : Medication<br />

with<strong>in</strong> the home<br />

In addition, a brief <strong>de</strong>scription is giv<strong>en</strong> of 5 <strong>in</strong>strum<strong>en</strong>ts for the assessm<strong>en</strong>t of functional<br />

status, case mix or quality of care <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes:<br />

1. Resource Utilization Groups Version III (RUG-III)<br />

2. Dutch Care Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy Scale<br />

3. Functional Autonomy Measurem<strong>en</strong>t System


28 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

4. Resi<strong>de</strong>nt Assessm<strong>en</strong>t Instrum<strong>en</strong>t for Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes (RAI)<br />

5. ACOVE (Assess<strong>in</strong>g Care of Vulnerable El<strong>de</strong>rs) Quality Criteria<br />

2.3 RESULTS OF THE LITERATURE REVIEW<br />

2.3.1 Why are el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong>stitutionalized?<br />

Nurs<strong>in</strong>g home placem<strong>en</strong>t is oft<strong>en</strong> the result of <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia, multiple illnesses, severe<br />

disease, or lack of social support. It is triggered by a s<strong>en</strong>t<strong>in</strong>el ev<strong>en</strong>t (e.g., major illness,<br />

acci<strong>de</strong>nt, hospitalization). Wan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>in</strong>g and disruptive behavioral problems are also<br />

significant factors lead<strong>in</strong>g to long-term care placem<strong>en</strong>t. Determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g the specific<br />

circumstances that led to a nurs<strong>in</strong>g home admission is an important elem<strong>en</strong>t of the<br />

<strong>in</strong>itial evaluation.<br />

The most common diagnoses at nurs<strong>in</strong>g home admission are 16 :<br />

M<strong>en</strong>tal disor<strong>de</strong>rs (<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia, <strong>de</strong>pression)<br />

Heart disease and cerebrovascular disease (heart failure, stroke)<br />

Nervous system disor<strong>de</strong>rs<br />

Injuries<br />

Endocr<strong>in</strong>e disor<strong>de</strong>rs (e.g., diabetes mellitus)<br />

Respiratory tract disor<strong>de</strong>rs (e.g., chronic obstructive pulmonary<br />

disease)<br />

Musculoskeletal disor<strong>de</strong>rs<br />

History tak<strong>in</strong>g at the mom<strong>en</strong>t of admission to the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home provi<strong>de</strong>s the<br />

opportunity to learn the most about resi<strong>de</strong>nts, not only their medical condition but also<br />

their functional abilities, social background, support system, <strong>in</strong>terests, hobbies, and<br />

previous daily rout<strong>in</strong>es. Inclusion of family members <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>itial resi<strong>de</strong>nt assessm<strong>en</strong>t<br />

can help allay anxiety or guilt feel<strong>in</strong>gs surround<strong>in</strong>g a nurs<strong>in</strong>g home admission and<br />

provi<strong>de</strong> opportunities to discuss expectations regard<strong>in</strong>g care and to establish treatm<strong>en</strong>t<br />

prefer<strong>en</strong>ces.<br />

Dem<strong>en</strong>tia emerged as the most pot<strong>en</strong>t risk factor for <strong>in</strong>stitutionalization <strong>in</strong> a 12-year<br />

prospective population-based epi<strong>de</strong>miological study. 17 Persons with <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia had nearly<br />

five times the risk of <strong>in</strong>stitutionalization as those who were not <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>ted. At 3- and 12year<br />

follow-ups, 5.8% and 13.6%, respectively, of the cohort members had be<strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutionalized. Increas<strong>in</strong>g age, impairm<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> ADL (activities of daily life) and less social<br />

support emerged as other less-critical risk factors <strong>in</strong> this study.<br />

Interest<strong>in</strong>gly, the <strong>in</strong>teraction betwe<strong>en</strong> the number of prescription medications and<br />

<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia was significant <strong>in</strong> the mo<strong>de</strong>l predict<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutionalization. Specifically,<br />

prescription medication count had less effect on <strong>in</strong>stitutionalization <strong>in</strong> those with<br />

<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia than <strong>in</strong> those without <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia. A likely explanation for this ph<strong>en</strong>om<strong>en</strong>on is<br />

the cl<strong>in</strong>ical observation that cognitively <strong>in</strong>tact persons are g<strong>en</strong>erally <strong>in</strong>stitutionalized for<br />

medical rehabilitation, whereas the pot<strong>en</strong>cy of <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia as a risk factor far outweighs<br />

the effect of medical co-morbidity <strong>in</strong> the cognitively impaired.<br />

The bur<strong>de</strong>n of care to immediate care givers is a crucial elem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> the process<br />

of <strong>in</strong>stitutionalization. Oft<strong>en</strong> families are able to care for an el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>t at home until<br />

he or she loses the ability to perform basic functions. The course of the ev<strong>en</strong>ts lead<strong>in</strong>g<br />

up to nurs<strong>in</strong>g home placem<strong>en</strong>t can provi<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>sight <strong>in</strong>to the pati<strong>en</strong>t's level of function<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and rate of <strong>de</strong>cl<strong>in</strong>e. Research studies published betwe<strong>en</strong> 1989 and 1995 were analyzed<br />

by Ch<strong>en</strong>ier 18 to i<strong>de</strong>ntify variables that led to caregiver bur<strong>de</strong>n and nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

placem<strong>en</strong>t of non-<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>ted el<strong>de</strong>rs. Although the variables impact each caregiv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

situation differ<strong>en</strong>tly, <strong>de</strong>creased functional abilities of the care receiver, <strong>in</strong>terrupted sleep<br />

of the caregiver or the pres<strong>en</strong>ce of multiple factors with<strong>in</strong> the caregiv<strong>in</strong>g situation were<br />

positively correlated with caregiver bur<strong>de</strong>n and <strong>in</strong>creased risk of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 29<br />

placem<strong>en</strong>t. Increased awar<strong>en</strong>ess of these issues is ess<strong>en</strong>tial to provi<strong>de</strong> successfully for<br />

the ag<strong>in</strong>g population.<br />

Cost sav<strong>in</strong>gs by postpon<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutionalization<br />

Although exp<strong>en</strong>ditures did not <strong>in</strong>crease with age for most services, the high personal<br />

cost for nurs<strong>in</strong>g home care among the ol<strong>de</strong>st old un<strong>de</strong>rl<strong>in</strong>es the need for <strong>in</strong>creased<br />

efforts to support them <strong>in</strong> the community (USA). 19 Greater sp<strong>en</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g by those <strong>in</strong> poor<br />

health highlights the importance of prev<strong>en</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g age-related health conditions and their<br />

complications. Improved access to discretionary care among the ol<strong>de</strong>st old may help to<br />

reduce the need for care <strong>in</strong> higher cost sett<strong>in</strong>gs. The high preval<strong>en</strong>ce of out-of-pocket<br />

prescription sp<strong>en</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g across the age range provi<strong>de</strong>s impetus for curr<strong>en</strong>t efforts to<br />

reduce these costs.<br />

Canadian research exam<strong>in</strong>ed the cost effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess of home care for s<strong>en</strong>iors as a<br />

substitute for long-term <strong>in</strong>stitutional services. Chappell et al. 20 computed the costs of<br />

formal care and <strong>in</strong>formal care <strong>in</strong> both sett<strong>in</strong>gs and <strong>en</strong>sured comparable groups of cli<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

<strong>in</strong> both sett<strong>in</strong>gs by compar<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>dividuals at the same level of care. The results reveal<br />

that costs were significantly lower for community cli<strong>en</strong>ts than for facility cli<strong>en</strong>ts,<br />

regardless of whether costs only to the governm<strong>en</strong>t were tak<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>to account or<br />

whether both formal and <strong>in</strong>formal costs were tak<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>to account. Wh<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>formal<br />

caregiver time is valued at either m<strong>in</strong>imum wage or replacem<strong>en</strong>t wage, there was a<br />

substantial jump <strong>in</strong> the average annual costs for both community and facility cli<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

relative to wh<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>formal caregiver time was valued at zero. Nevertheless, the results<br />

reveal that home care is significantly less costly than resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care ev<strong>en</strong> wh<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>formal<br />

caregiver time is valued at replacem<strong>en</strong>t wage.<br />

Loss of <strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nce <strong>in</strong> ol<strong>de</strong>r persons places consi<strong>de</strong>rable f<strong>in</strong>ancial bur<strong>de</strong>n on them,<br />

their families, and the health care system. 21 The Medicare Curr<strong>en</strong>t B<strong>en</strong>eficiary Survey<br />

estimated the additional medical and long-term care costs that occur dur<strong>in</strong>g the year<br />

wh<strong>en</strong> ol<strong>de</strong>r persons make the transition to <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy at home or move to a nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home. Average long-term care costs were $3,400 for persons who <strong>de</strong>veloped activities<br />

of daily liv<strong>in</strong>g disability at home sometime dur<strong>in</strong>g the year, $6,800 for those start<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

<strong>en</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g the year with disability who rema<strong>in</strong>ed at home, and more than $21,000 for those<br />

mov<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>to a nurs<strong>in</strong>g home dur<strong>in</strong>g the year.<br />

2.3.2 What are the most preval<strong>en</strong>t functional and cl<strong>in</strong>ical problems among<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts?<br />

In or<strong>de</strong>r to assess properly the medication needs of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts, it is<br />

necessary to have an i<strong>de</strong>a of the cl<strong>in</strong>ical problems common to this el<strong>de</strong>rly population.<br />

We will address<br />

2.3.2.1 Cl<strong>in</strong>ical assessm<strong>en</strong>t<br />

Cl<strong>in</strong>ical Assessm<strong>en</strong>t<br />

Functional Assessm<strong>en</strong>t<br />

Nutritional assessm<strong>en</strong>t<br />

Assessm<strong>en</strong>t of communication needs<br />

Assessm<strong>en</strong>t of palliative care needs<br />

Pati<strong>en</strong>t Autonomy<br />

Heckman et al. 22 found that heart failure is common <strong>in</strong> Canadian long-term care (LTC)<br />

facilities, but un<strong>de</strong>rtreated. The preval<strong>en</strong>ce of heart failure was 20%. LTC resi<strong>de</strong>nts with<br />

heart failure were ol<strong>de</strong>r, more oft<strong>en</strong> wom<strong>en</strong>, and more functionally impaired and<br />

bur<strong>de</strong>ned by co-morbidity than were participants <strong>in</strong> heart failure trials. Docum<strong>en</strong>tation


30 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

support<strong>in</strong>g the heart failure diagnosis was <strong>in</strong>a<strong>de</strong>quate, with some symptoms possibly<br />

misattributed to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.<br />

Hass et al. 23 <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> a retrospective population-based study <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

(Rochester USA 1989-1994) that nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts with major stroke were<br />

younger and more disabled and required more services than resi<strong>de</strong>nts without stroke.<br />

Per diem Medicaid reimbursem<strong>en</strong>t was 11% higher for resi<strong>de</strong>nts with major stroke<br />

compared with resi<strong>de</strong>nts without stroke. Nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts with m<strong>in</strong>or stroke<br />

appeared similar to those without stroke with respect to time to admission,<br />

characteristics at first assessm<strong>en</strong>t and per diem Medicaid reimbursem<strong>en</strong>t. They<br />

conclu<strong>de</strong>d that lower <strong>in</strong>ci<strong>de</strong>nce and severity of stroke (e.g. by better controll<strong>in</strong>g<br />

diabetes and hypert<strong>en</strong>sion) may contribute to lower care needs and per diem cost.<br />

Rheumatic diseases are common <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly people, 24 are <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> frequ<strong>en</strong>cy and are<br />

un<strong>de</strong>rtreated. Ext<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d care facilities have special needs and restrictions, mak<strong>in</strong>g pa<strong>in</strong><br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t more complicated. Un<strong>de</strong>rstand<strong>in</strong>g how to assess pa<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong> a population at<br />

risk for poor pa<strong>in</strong> control is vital. Treatm<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>dividualized to the pati<strong>en</strong>t's special<br />

circumstances where optimal care rarely means cure or complete relief of symptoms<br />

leads to improved function and quality of life.<br />

In a study of care homes <strong>in</strong> the UK, S<strong>in</strong>clair et al. 25 found a 12% preval<strong>en</strong>ce of known<br />

diabetes. In the group of care home resi<strong>de</strong>nts not known to have diabetes and able to<br />

un<strong>de</strong>rgo test<strong>in</strong>g, a substantial proportion (14,7%) has un<strong>de</strong>tected diabetes based on a 2h<br />

postglucose load. It is possible that resi<strong>de</strong>nts with newly <strong>de</strong>tected diabetes will b<strong>en</strong>efit<br />

from early treatm<strong>en</strong>t of raised glucose levels by experi<strong>en</strong>c<strong>in</strong>g reduction of osmotic<br />

symptoms, improvem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> cognition and assessm<strong>en</strong>t of any vascular complications.<br />

Whereas these actions are unlikely to lead to an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> life expectancy of diabetic<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts, they may add some value to their quality of life.<br />

To <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>e the magnitu<strong>de</strong> and distribution of nosocomial <strong>in</strong>fections <strong>in</strong> LTC<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutions, the Norwegian Institute of Public Health <strong>in</strong>itiated a surveillance system. The<br />

system is based on two annual one-day preval<strong>en</strong>ce surveys record<strong>in</strong>g the four most<br />

common nosocomial <strong>in</strong>fections: ur<strong>in</strong>ary tract <strong>in</strong>fections, lower respiratory tract<br />

<strong>in</strong>fections, surgical-site <strong>in</strong>fections and sk<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>fections, as well as antibiotic use. The total<br />

preval<strong>en</strong>ce of the four recor<strong>de</strong>d nosocomial <strong>in</strong>fections varied <strong>in</strong> 2004 betwe<strong>en</strong> 6.6 and<br />

7.3%, 26 whereas the lowest preval<strong>en</strong>ce was found <strong>in</strong> special units for persons with<br />

<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia. In the survey the preval<strong>en</strong>ce of the four recor<strong>de</strong>d nosocomial <strong>in</strong>fections was<br />

higher than the preval<strong>en</strong>ce of pati<strong>en</strong>ts receiv<strong>in</strong>g antibiotics. After the survey, the<br />

Norwegian Institute of Public Health recomm<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d the implem<strong>en</strong>tation of <strong>in</strong>fection<br />

control programs <strong>in</strong> facilities that had not yet done so, stated the importance of<br />

employ<strong>in</strong>g more nurses <strong>in</strong> long-term care facilities, and recomm<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g of<br />

unskilled personnel <strong>in</strong> basic <strong>in</strong>fection prev<strong>en</strong>tion pr<strong>in</strong>ciples.<br />

The carriage of Methicill<strong>in</strong> Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus is <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes. The <strong>de</strong>tection of MRSA carriers <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes needs to be realized un<strong>de</strong>r<br />

particular conditions. Decolonization of carriers is absolutely ess<strong>en</strong>tial. 27<br />

Dem<strong>en</strong>tia, oft<strong>en</strong> the ma<strong>in</strong> cause for <strong>in</strong>stitutionalization, is common among nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts. Measurem<strong>en</strong>t of cognitive ability should be performed with standardized, easy<br />

to adm<strong>in</strong>ister <strong>in</strong>strum<strong>en</strong>ts, such as the M<strong>in</strong>i-M<strong>en</strong>tal State Exam<strong>in</strong>ation (MMSE). Formal<br />

tests are useful because impressions based on conversations with the pati<strong>en</strong>t can be<br />

mislead<strong>in</strong>g. Pati<strong>en</strong>ts who are aware of hav<strong>in</strong>g a slight <strong>de</strong>cl<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong> m<strong>en</strong>tal processes may<br />

cope by redirect<strong>in</strong>g conversations or mak<strong>in</strong>g excuses for their memory loss <strong>in</strong> an<br />

attempt to create the impression that they have no impairm<strong>en</strong>t. In contrast, some<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts may appear to be <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>ted wh<strong>en</strong>, <strong>in</strong> fact, their function is limited by another<br />

physical or m<strong>en</strong>tal condition (e.g., <strong>de</strong>creased visual or hear<strong>in</strong>g acuity, <strong>de</strong>pression). Such<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts may perform better on the MMSE than would be expected from conversations<br />

with them dur<strong>in</strong>g history tak<strong>in</strong>g and physical exam<strong>in</strong>ation. Therefore, measurem<strong>en</strong>t of<br />

cognitive skills with a standardized <strong>in</strong>strum<strong>en</strong>t is ess<strong>en</strong>tial for establish<strong>in</strong>g a basel<strong>in</strong>e to<br />

assess changes or responses to therapeutic <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tions. Wu N et al. 28 found that both<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home staff and study nurses recor<strong>de</strong>d less frequ<strong>en</strong>t and less severe pa<strong>in</strong> for<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts with more severe cognitive impairm<strong>en</strong>t. Their results strongly support the<br />

notion that specialized pa<strong>in</strong> assessm<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>strum<strong>en</strong>ts are nee<strong>de</strong>d to a<strong>de</strong>quately <strong>de</strong>tect


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 31<br />

pa<strong>in</strong> for the large proportion of cognitive impaired nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts. T<strong>en</strong> perc<strong>en</strong>t<br />

of the <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tias show language disturbances as the first sign. Language disturbances<br />

may exist for a long time, ev<strong>en</strong> before the onset of the memory impairm<strong>en</strong>t. The<br />

language disor<strong>de</strong>r causes difficulty <strong>in</strong> proper judgm<strong>en</strong>t of memory. Logopaedic<br />

exam<strong>in</strong>ation is necessary to diagnose the language disor<strong>de</strong>r. Neuropsychological test<strong>in</strong>g<br />

should take the language disor<strong>de</strong>r <strong>in</strong>to account. Diagnostic accuracy is important.<br />

Dist<strong>in</strong>guish<strong>in</strong>g <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia from a language disor<strong>de</strong>r has implications for the judgm<strong>en</strong>t of<br />

the pati<strong>en</strong>t's (dis)abilities and managem<strong>en</strong>t. 29<br />

The preval<strong>en</strong>ce of <strong>de</strong>pression <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home population is high. 30 Whichever way<br />

<strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed, the preval<strong>en</strong>ce rates found were three to four times higher than <strong>in</strong> the<br />

community-dwell<strong>in</strong>g el<strong>de</strong>rly. Age, pa<strong>in</strong>, visual impairm<strong>en</strong>t, stroke, functional limitations,<br />

negative life ev<strong>en</strong>ts, lonel<strong>in</strong>ess, lack of social support and perceived <strong>in</strong>a<strong>de</strong>quacy of care<br />

were found to be risk <strong>in</strong>dicators for <strong>de</strong>pression. Although <strong>de</strong>pressive symptoms<br />

seriously affect the quality of life of a grow<strong>in</strong>g proportion of el<strong>de</strong>rly people <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial<br />

care homes, many resi<strong>de</strong>nts do not receive a<strong>de</strong>quate anti<strong>de</strong>pressant treatm<strong>en</strong>t. Lack of<br />

recognition of <strong>de</strong>pressive symptoms and signs by the att<strong>en</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g staff <strong>in</strong> the resi<strong>de</strong>ntial<br />

home is a major obstacle to the provision of a<strong>de</strong>quate treatm<strong>en</strong>t. Eisses et al. 31<br />

evaluated the effects of a program of care staff tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial homes on the<br />

recognition of <strong>de</strong>pression, the treatm<strong>en</strong>t rate and the prognosis of those with<br />

<strong>de</strong>pression. Recognition of <strong>de</strong>pression <strong>in</strong>creased more <strong>in</strong> homes where staff received<br />

the tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g than <strong>in</strong> the control homes. Treatm<strong>en</strong>t rates also <strong>in</strong>creased compared with<br />

control homes, but the <strong>in</strong>crease was not significant. Resi<strong>de</strong>nts with <strong>de</strong>pressive<br />

symptoms had a more favourable course wh<strong>en</strong> staff had received tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g. Moreover,<br />

the preval<strong>en</strong>ce of <strong>de</strong>pressive symptoms <strong>de</strong>creased, but the <strong>de</strong>crease was not significant.<br />

2.3.2.2 Functional assessm<strong>en</strong>t<br />

Perform<strong>in</strong>g functional assessm<strong>en</strong>t of resi<strong>de</strong>nts may have multiple purposes:<br />

to reliably assess the status of the <strong>in</strong>dividual pati<strong>en</strong>t<br />

to assess the bur<strong>de</strong>n of care with<strong>in</strong> an <strong>in</strong>stitution (case-mix assessm<strong>en</strong>t)<br />

to monitor the outcome of processes of care<br />

Functional level can be measured with low sophistication by two g<strong>en</strong>eral purpose scales:<br />

Activities of Daily Liv<strong>in</strong>g (ADLs) and Instrum<strong>en</strong>tal Activities of Daily Liv<strong>in</strong>g (IADLs).<br />

In App<strong>en</strong>dix 7, a number of more sophisticated <strong>in</strong>strum<strong>en</strong>ts are pres<strong>en</strong>ted:<br />

Resource Utilisation Version III (RUG-III)<br />

Dutch Care Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy Scale<br />

Functional Autonomy Measurem<strong>en</strong>t System<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nts Assessm<strong>en</strong>t Instrum<strong>en</strong>t for Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes (RAI)<br />

In nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, some aspects of functional status are particularly important:<br />

Visual impairm<strong>en</strong>t<br />

Hear<strong>in</strong>g handicap<br />

Oral health problems<br />

Incont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>ce<br />

Vision impairm<strong>en</strong>t is a contribut<strong>in</strong>g cause of disability and activity limitation among the<br />

nation s el<strong>de</strong>rly, and can have profound implications for their quality of life. 32 Dim<strong>in</strong>ish<strong>in</strong>g<br />

eyesight contributes to a reduction <strong>in</strong> their physical, functional, and emotional well<br />

be<strong>in</strong>g, ev<strong>en</strong> after controll<strong>in</strong>g for g<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r, cognitive status, and basel<strong>in</strong>e function.<br />

Furthermore, visual impairm<strong>en</strong>t has be<strong>en</strong> related to <strong>in</strong>creased risk of falls and hip<br />

fractures, <strong>de</strong>pression, and cognitive <strong>de</strong>cl<strong>in</strong>e lead<strong>in</strong>g to disruptive behaviors. An expert<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home panel with<strong>in</strong> The Assess<strong>in</strong>g Care of Vulnerable El<strong>de</strong>rs (ACOVE) study


32 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

i<strong>de</strong>ntified 13 quality <strong>in</strong>dicators relative to vision impairm<strong>en</strong>t that were felt valid and<br />

feasible <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts.<br />

Garahan et al. 33 found that self-assessm<strong>en</strong>ts of hear<strong>in</strong>g handicap by resi<strong>de</strong>nts, together<br />

with audiometric f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs and expressed <strong>in</strong>terest <strong>in</strong> a hear<strong>in</strong>g aid, were more useful<br />

gui<strong>de</strong>s for aural rehabilitation needs than were nurses' assessm<strong>en</strong>ts of resi<strong>de</strong>nts'<br />

handicaps. Medical records failed to i<strong>de</strong>ntify 48% of resi<strong>de</strong>nts with mo<strong>de</strong>rate to severe<br />

hear<strong>in</strong>g losses. They conclu<strong>de</strong>d that resi<strong>de</strong>nts should have hear<strong>in</strong>g evaluations with<br />

docum<strong>en</strong>tation of results on admission and periodically un<strong>de</strong>r the direction of a nurse<br />

tra<strong>in</strong>ed as a hear<strong>in</strong>g specialist.<br />

Evaluat<strong>in</strong>g the realistic oral treatm<strong>en</strong>t need <strong>in</strong> a population <strong>in</strong> southern Swe<strong>de</strong>n <strong>en</strong>rolled<br />

<strong>in</strong> long-term care, <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes or home care, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>de</strong>ntal status, oral mucosal<br />

status, oral hygi<strong>en</strong>e status, oral mucosal <strong>in</strong>flammation and oral mucosal friction, Isaksson<br />

et al. 34 found that 61% of the sample had a need not just for an oral health evaluation<br />

but also for additional <strong>de</strong>ntal treatm<strong>en</strong>t. The results <strong>in</strong>dicate that realistic oral treatm<strong>en</strong>t<br />

need, tak<strong>in</strong>g their medical condition <strong>in</strong>to consi<strong>de</strong>ration, is mo<strong>de</strong>st <strong>in</strong> this population, but<br />

that regular oral scre<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g is mandatory.<br />

Ur<strong>in</strong>ary <strong>in</strong>cont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>ce is a common but chall<strong>en</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g problem <strong>in</strong> the long-term care<br />

<strong>en</strong>vironm<strong>en</strong>t plagued by ris<strong>in</strong>g costs, limited resources, and high rates of staff turnover.<br />

Successful managem<strong>en</strong>t of <strong>in</strong>cont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>ce <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home is possible but it requires a<br />

compreh<strong>en</strong>sive evaluation of the resi<strong>de</strong>nt and a formalized plan of care that is<br />

<strong>in</strong>dividualized to the resi<strong>de</strong>nt s unique needs. 35 Cardiovascular disease, m<strong>en</strong>tal disor<strong>de</strong>rs,<br />

and <strong>en</strong>docr<strong>in</strong>e disease such as diabetes and hypothyroidism (all common afflictions <strong>in</strong><br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes) are all risk factors for <strong>in</strong>cont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>ce.<br />

2.3.2.3 Nutritional assessm<strong>en</strong>t<br />

Pati<strong>en</strong>t's nutritional status should be systematically assessed, because more than one<br />

third of persons over age 75 are un<strong>de</strong>rweight. A weight loss of 5% <strong>in</strong> 1 month or 10% <strong>in</strong><br />

6 months is consi<strong>de</strong>red significant. 16 Many factors place ol<strong>de</strong>r pati<strong>en</strong>ts at risk for poor<br />

nutrition. For example, the <strong>in</strong>ability to feed oneself can result <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>a<strong>de</strong>quate caloric<br />

<strong>in</strong>take. Mechanical causes of eat<strong>in</strong>g difficulty (e.g., ill-fitt<strong>in</strong>g <strong>de</strong>ntures, swallow<strong>in</strong>g<br />

difficulties due to stroke) should be sought and appropriate evaluative or therapeutic<br />

measures un<strong>de</strong>rtak<strong>en</strong>. Also, nausea or loss of appetite result<strong>in</strong>g from use of certa<strong>in</strong><br />

medications (e.g., digox<strong>in</strong>, anti<strong>de</strong>pressants) can affect pati<strong>en</strong>ts' nutritional status.<br />

Defici<strong>en</strong>cies of specific nutri<strong>en</strong>ts, such as calcium, z<strong>in</strong>c, sel<strong>en</strong>ium, magnesium, vitam<strong>in</strong> D,<br />

vitam<strong>in</strong> B 12, and folate, are important to consi<strong>de</strong>r <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts. Because<br />

many el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts have poor calcium <strong>in</strong>take and calcium supplem<strong>en</strong>tation is usually<br />

well tolerated, supplem<strong>en</strong>tation with calcium and vitam<strong>in</strong> D is advocated.<br />

2.3.2.4 Assessm<strong>en</strong>t of communication needs<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nts' limited opportunities for communication with staff are primarily focused on<br />

care tasks. Conversations <strong>in</strong> staff-resi<strong>de</strong>nt <strong>in</strong>teraction focus on activities of daily liv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

(ADLs), personal-social care, technical care, and health assessm<strong>en</strong>t. Williams et al. 36<br />

<strong>de</strong>scribed an <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion which leads to <strong>in</strong>creased communication awar<strong>en</strong>ess among<br />

staff, with an <strong>in</strong>creased ability to modify conversational topics to better meet ol<strong>de</strong>r<br />

adults' psychosocial needs.<br />

2.3.2.5 Assessm<strong>en</strong>t of palliative care needs<br />

Discussion of future care plans and advance directives should be part of care plann<strong>in</strong>g<br />

for all el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts admitted to an ext<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d-care facility. This discussion can help<br />

clarify concerns pati<strong>en</strong>ts and families may have regard<strong>in</strong>g the mean<strong>in</strong>g of such <strong>de</strong>cisions.<br />

By assist<strong>in</strong>g pati<strong>en</strong>ts or their <strong>de</strong>signated guardians <strong>in</strong> clearly spell<strong>in</strong>g out their wishes<br />

about <strong>en</strong>d-of-life care, physicians can help them avoid the need to make these critical<br />

<strong>de</strong>cisions <strong>in</strong> a mom<strong>en</strong>t of crisis.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 33<br />

2.3.2.6 Pati<strong>en</strong>t autonomy<br />

Faced with the chall<strong>en</strong>ge of respect<strong>in</strong>g resi<strong>de</strong>nt autonomy and simultaneously adher<strong>in</strong>g<br />

to nurs<strong>in</strong>g home standards, nurs<strong>in</strong>g home staff oft<strong>en</strong> experi<strong>en</strong>ces a f<strong>rust</strong>rat<strong>in</strong>g ethical<br />

conflict.<br />

Scott et al. 37 explored pati<strong>en</strong>t autonomy, privacy and <strong>in</strong>formed cons<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> the care of<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly people <strong>in</strong> long-stay care facilities. Results <strong>in</strong>dicated marked differ<strong>en</strong>ces betwe<strong>en</strong><br />

staff's and resi<strong>de</strong>nts' responses on three of the four dim<strong>en</strong>sions explored: <strong>in</strong>formationgiv<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

opportunity to participate <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong>cision-mak<strong>in</strong>g about care and cons<strong>en</strong>t. There was<br />

much closer agreem<strong>en</strong>t betwe<strong>en</strong> staff's and resi<strong>de</strong>nts' responses regard<strong>in</strong>g protection of<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>t privacy. F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs suggest there is still a significant need to educate staff<br />

concern<strong>in</strong>g ethical awar<strong>en</strong>ess and s<strong>en</strong>sitivity to the dignity and rights of pati<strong>en</strong>ts.<br />

Schnelle et al. 38 <strong>in</strong>vestigated the use of restra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. Resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> highrestra<strong>in</strong>t<br />

homes were <strong>in</strong> bed more oft<strong>en</strong> dur<strong>in</strong>g the day, oft<strong>en</strong> associated with poor<br />

feed<strong>in</strong>g assistance, reflect<strong>in</strong>g important differ<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> quality of care betwe<strong>en</strong> homes.<br />

Butterworth 39 explored the concept of cons<strong>en</strong>t and proposed that cons<strong>en</strong>t for ol<strong>de</strong>r<br />

people <strong>in</strong> long-term care is not a discrete episo<strong>de</strong> requir<strong>in</strong>g a cons<strong>en</strong>t form, but is one<br />

aspect of the process of <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g service users <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong>cisions about their care.<br />

No formal <strong>in</strong>strum<strong>en</strong>ts to measure pati<strong>en</strong>t autonomy have be<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong>veloped for the<br />

sett<strong>in</strong>g of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.<br />

Particularly <strong>in</strong> relation with medication, the question of pati<strong>en</strong>t autonomy is important.<br />

Most nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes have <strong>de</strong>veloped a rigorous distribution system for medication, to<br />

m<strong>in</strong>imize medication errors. This distribution system is oft<strong>en</strong> forced on all resi<strong>de</strong>nts,<br />

regardless of their cognitive status. 40 Nurses and managers may be reluctant to grant<br />

exceptions for autonomous pati<strong>en</strong>ts, who are capable of tak<strong>in</strong>g responsibility for their<br />

own medication managem<strong>en</strong>t.<br />

2.3.3 What are the problems with medication usage and how can quality of<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g be assessed <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes?<br />

2.3.3.1 Curr<strong>en</strong>t problems with medication prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

To be at high-quality level, medication managem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes should <strong>in</strong>sure that<br />

the resi<strong>de</strong>nts ga<strong>in</strong> the maximum therapeutic b<strong>en</strong>efit from their medication <strong>in</strong> or<strong>de</strong>r to<br />

ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> or improve the quality and duration of life, and do no suffer unnecessarily from<br />

illness caused by excessive, <strong>in</strong>appropriate or <strong>in</strong>a<strong>de</strong>quate consumption of medic<strong>in</strong>es.<br />

Concern has be<strong>en</strong> expressed about the quality of drug treatm<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.<br />

Anxiety about the risk of excessive prescrib<strong>in</strong>g of, for example, <strong>in</strong>appropriate<br />

neuroleptic drugs, is matched by concern about the consequ<strong>en</strong>ces of un<strong>de</strong>rprescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

pot<strong>en</strong>tially b<strong>en</strong>eficial drugs. Other factors imped<strong>in</strong>g the quality of drug treatm<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong><br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes are the prescription of contra-<strong>in</strong>dicated drugs, chemical restra<strong>in</strong>t of<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts and drug-related hospital admissions. The latter aspect may be caused partly<br />

by medication errors, a form of system failure more related to the distribution of<br />

medic<strong>in</strong>es to and <strong>in</strong>si<strong>de</strong> the <strong>in</strong>stitutions than to the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

F<strong>in</strong>ally, nurs<strong>in</strong>g home directions should also pay more att<strong>en</strong>tion to the f<strong>in</strong>ancial aspect of<br />

drug treatm<strong>en</strong>t.<br />

Overprescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

The el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eral use more medications than any other age group. This high rate of<br />

drug use has be<strong>en</strong> attributed <strong>in</strong> part to the accumulation of diseases with age<strong>in</strong>g 41 , but<br />

also to the <strong>in</strong>appropriate prescrib<strong>in</strong>g of medications outsi<strong>de</strong> the bounds of accepted<br />

medical standards. 42<br />

A 2000 study of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes revealed that <strong>in</strong>dividual nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts receive<br />

an average of 6.7 rout<strong>in</strong>e prescription medications per day and 2.7 additional<br />

medications on an as nee<strong>de</strong>d basis. It is not surpris<strong>in</strong>g that nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts


34 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

receive more medications than the community dwell<strong>in</strong>g el<strong>de</strong>rly. 43, 44 For example, a<br />

study on 1,106 resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> 12 nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes of a large city <strong>in</strong> the US showed resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

are on an average of 7.2 medications. 45 Furthermore, as people age, pharmacok<strong>in</strong>etic<br />

and pharmacodynamic changes occur that can affect the disposition of medications <strong>in</strong><br />

the body. This comb<strong>in</strong>ation of polypharmacy and pharmacok<strong>in</strong>etic and<br />

pharmacodynamic changes lead to an <strong>in</strong>creased risk of adverse drug reactions (ADR),<br />

<strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed as an <strong>in</strong>jury from medication. There is a l<strong>in</strong>ear relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> the number<br />

of drugs tak<strong>en</strong> and the <strong>in</strong>creased pot<strong>en</strong>tial for ADR. 46 The nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts are<br />

the frailest segm<strong>en</strong>t of the geriatric population, us<strong>in</strong>g the highest number of medications<br />

compared to the non-<strong>in</strong>stitutionalized el<strong>de</strong>rly, thus hav<strong>in</strong>g the highest risk for an ADR.<br />

Further complicat<strong>in</strong>g this issue, ADR are oft<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>terpreted as a disease of old age<br />

result<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> another drug ad<strong>de</strong>d to the pati<strong>en</strong>t s therapy by the doctor. 47<br />

Misprescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Certa<strong>in</strong> drugs should be avoi<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> ol<strong>de</strong>r adults or should only be used un<strong>de</strong>r certa<strong>in</strong><br />

circumstances, s<strong>in</strong>ce their pot<strong>en</strong>tial risk outweighs the pot<strong>en</strong>tial b<strong>en</strong>efit. 48 The<br />

prescription of such contra<strong>in</strong>dicated drugs also repres<strong>en</strong>ts an area of concern <strong>in</strong> the<br />

medication use of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts, as it can lead to morbidity, mortality and<br />

<strong>in</strong>creased costs of care. 49<br />

The quality of drug managem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes is also affected by the <strong>in</strong>appropriate<br />

use of psychoactive drugs to control problematic behaviors and <strong>in</strong>duce sedation of the<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts ( chemical restra<strong>in</strong>t ). The effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess of psychotropic drugs to treat<br />

disruptive behavior rema<strong>in</strong>s uncerta<strong>in</strong> because most episo<strong>de</strong>s are self-limited. Research<br />

has shown that not only are the drugs oft<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>effective, but they may actually precipitate<br />

an agitated state. 50<br />

Un<strong>de</strong>rprescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Another important and <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>gly recognized problem <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts is<br />

un<strong>de</strong>rtreatm<strong>en</strong>t, <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed as the omission of drug therapy that is <strong>in</strong>dicated for the<br />

treatm<strong>en</strong>t or prev<strong>en</strong>tion of a disease or condition. Un<strong>de</strong>rtreatm<strong>en</strong>t has be<strong>en</strong> reported<br />

for diseases as asthma, cardiovascular disease, dyslipi<strong>de</strong>mia, osteoporosis, pa<strong>in</strong>,<br />

hypert<strong>en</strong>sion and <strong>de</strong>pression, and un<strong>de</strong>ruse of angiot<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>-convert<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong>zyme (ACE)<br />

<strong>in</strong>hibitor medications <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts with congestive heart failure, anticoagulation <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts with atrial fibrillation, and prev<strong>en</strong>tive therapy after myocardial <strong>in</strong>farction.<br />

51, 42, 52<br />

Un<strong>de</strong>rtreatm<strong>en</strong>t may have an important relationship with negative health outcomes <strong>in</strong><br />

the el<strong>de</strong>rly, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g disability, <strong>de</strong>ath and health services use. 42<br />

Drug-related hospital admissions<br />

Many studies have shown that a high number of geriatric pati<strong>en</strong>ts experi<strong>en</strong>ce drugrelated<br />

problems lead<strong>in</strong>g to hospital admission. 53-62 However, the <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ition of the<br />

problems <strong>in</strong>vestigated <strong>in</strong> these studies varies markedly from study to study. In all the<br />

publications m<strong>en</strong>tioned <strong>in</strong> the refer<strong>en</strong>ce list, we found that adverse drug reactions<br />

(ADRs) were consi<strong>de</strong>red; <strong>in</strong> some publications non-compliance, improper drug<br />

selection, untreated <strong>in</strong>dications and drug use without <strong>in</strong>dication were also consi<strong>de</strong>red.<br />

These last problems can be <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed as drug therapy failures (DTFs).<br />

The frequ<strong>en</strong>cy of hospital admissions due to drug-related problems <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly is<br />

found to be 10 to 30%. The majority of these problems seem to be adverse drug<br />

reactions. Differ<strong>en</strong>ce <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>ci<strong>de</strong>nce can be expla<strong>in</strong>ed by a differ<strong>en</strong>t classification system of<br />

type of problems, and of contribution to hospital admission.<br />

Several studies have <strong>in</strong>vestigated the prev<strong>en</strong>tability of drug-related problems <strong>in</strong> the<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly, which is found to be substantial, vary<strong>in</strong>g from 50% to 97%. 53, 55, 57, 59, 61, 63 From<br />

those studies criteria for <strong>in</strong>appropriate medication use <strong>in</strong> geriatric pati<strong>en</strong>ts can be<br />

<strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed, with medications that should be avoi<strong>de</strong>d g<strong>en</strong>erally <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly, or <strong>in</strong> the<br />

pres<strong>en</strong>ce of specific co-morbidities, or wh<strong>en</strong> dosages or frequ<strong>en</strong>cies may exceed<br />

tolerable levels. 64, 48, 65-69 The drugs concerned are c<strong>en</strong>tral nervous drugs, drugs with<br />

antichol<strong>in</strong>ergic properties, drugs with a narrow therapeutic-toxic range, slow release


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 35<br />

preparations Wh<strong>en</strong> tak<strong>in</strong>g these criteria <strong>in</strong>to account, many drug-related problems <strong>in</strong><br />

the el<strong>de</strong>rly could be avoi<strong>de</strong>d. Most of the studies <strong>de</strong>scribed above study the el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong><br />

g<strong>en</strong>eral and few studies specific for the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home sett<strong>in</strong>g exist.<br />

Exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for medication <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

For a variety of reasons the managem<strong>en</strong>t of prescription drugs <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes is now<br />

poised to emerge as a critical policy issue. 70 Awar<strong>en</strong>ess of drug sp<strong>en</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes has grown as budget problems have forced <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>gly aggressive cost<br />

conta<strong>in</strong>m<strong>en</strong>t policies. Second, as pharmaceutical <strong>in</strong>novation cont<strong>in</strong>ues, new and<br />

exp<strong>en</strong>sive medications are rapidly be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>de</strong>veloped for the el<strong>de</strong>rly population.<br />

Avery et al. 71 compared the costs of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g, the number of items on prescription<br />

and the types of drugs prescribed for ol<strong>de</strong>r people <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes with ol<strong>de</strong>r people<br />

liv<strong>in</strong>g at home by means of a retrospective case-control study. The mean cost of<br />

prescriptions per pati<strong>en</strong>t-month was almost three times higher for nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts than controls (45.27£ compared to 16.46£). The mean number of items<br />

prescribed per pati<strong>en</strong>t-month was also higher <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g home pati<strong>en</strong>ts (5.60 compared<br />

to 2.55). There were differ<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> the types of medication prescribed betwe<strong>en</strong> the two<br />

groups, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g consi<strong>de</strong>rably higher costs for c<strong>en</strong>tral nervous system drugs, ulcer<br />

heal<strong>in</strong>g drugs, laxatives and <strong>en</strong>teral nutrition <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts.<br />

O'Neill et al. 72 exam<strong>in</strong>ed variations <strong>in</strong> prescrib<strong>in</strong>g costs associated with nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts and pati<strong>en</strong>ts matched by age and sex liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the community (UK). They<br />

conclu<strong>de</strong>d that the ability of the multivariate mo<strong>de</strong>ls they used to expla<strong>in</strong> variations <strong>in</strong><br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g costs among a group of el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts is poor. Adjust<strong>in</strong>g weighted<br />

capitation formulae with respect to ol<strong>de</strong>r pati<strong>en</strong>ts to take account of such <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

or referr<strong>in</strong>g to it <strong>in</strong> negotiations on prescrib<strong>in</strong>g budgets would not appear to be<br />

warranted.<br />

There are markedly differ<strong>en</strong>t f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g structures to reimburse for drugs:<br />

Institutions subsidized on the basis of discounted price for drugs on a<br />

per-drug basis<br />

Impos<strong>in</strong>g f<strong>in</strong>ancial risk on nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes by <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g drugs <strong>in</strong> the<br />

prospective paym<strong>en</strong>t rate<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nts pay<strong>in</strong>g out-of-pocket a non-discounted price for drugs on a<br />

per-drug basis.<br />

2.3.3.2 How can the quality of medication usage <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes be assessed?<br />

Medications are a very important aspect of the care of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts.<br />

Therefore, medication use provi<strong>de</strong>s an i<strong>de</strong>al opportunity for monitor<strong>in</strong>g the quality of<br />

care. Explicit or implicit, evi<strong>de</strong>nce-based criteria for <strong>in</strong>appropriate medication use such<br />

as the Beers criteria and the Medication Appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess In<strong>de</strong>x (MAI) are well known<br />

and implem<strong>en</strong>ted. However research is still ongo<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the area of the <strong>de</strong>velopm<strong>en</strong>t of<br />

new quality <strong>in</strong>dicators specific for the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home population. Prescription data are<br />

frequ<strong>en</strong>tly used as <strong>in</strong>dicators, but an important limitation is that they do not take <strong>in</strong>to<br />

account <strong>in</strong>formation about disease and pati<strong>en</strong>t factors important for judg<strong>in</strong>g the quality<br />

of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g. 73<br />

The most wi<strong>de</strong>ly known explicit <strong>in</strong>dicator for appropriate medication use <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes is the Beers list, <strong>de</strong>veloped <strong>in</strong> 1991 <strong>in</strong> the US by a group of 13 national experts.<br />

This list <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d 19 medications that should be avoi<strong>de</strong>d, as well as 11 doses,<br />

frequ<strong>en</strong>cies or durations of medication prescriptions that should not be excee<strong>de</strong>d. The<br />

list was updated both <strong>in</strong> 1997 and 2003. 74 Drug-disease <strong>in</strong>teractions and severity<br />

rank<strong>in</strong>gs have also be<strong>en</strong> ad<strong>de</strong>d. This type of <strong>in</strong>dicators is subject to several limitations,<br />

such as a poor specificity, a not established reliability and the fact that they are not to<br />

be g<strong>en</strong>eralized to other countries.<br />

The Medication Appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess In<strong>de</strong>x (MAI) evaluates for <strong>in</strong>dividual pati<strong>en</strong>ts each<br />

medication us<strong>in</strong>g 10 criteria that take <strong>in</strong>to account efficacy, safety and cost aspects of


36 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess. 75 These 10 rat<strong>in</strong>gs can be comb<strong>in</strong>ed to produce a weighted score per<br />

medication. The MAI is a time-consum<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>strum<strong>en</strong>t, but is curr<strong>en</strong>tly the most<br />

compreh<strong>en</strong>sive <strong>in</strong>strum<strong>en</strong>t to measure appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly.<br />

In Norway, a compreh<strong>en</strong>sive set of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>in</strong>dicators was <strong>de</strong>veloped, based<br />

on data from the health care record and medication charts of <strong>in</strong>stitutionalized el<strong>de</strong>rly. 76<br />

More <strong>de</strong>tails on this list are giv<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> the method section and the result section of this<br />

report.<br />

The ACOVE Project (Assess<strong>in</strong>g Care Of the Vulnerable El<strong>de</strong>r) used systematic<br />

literature reviews, expert op<strong>in</strong>ions and the guidance of expert groups and stakehol<strong>de</strong>rs<br />

<strong>in</strong> the US to <strong>de</strong>velop a compreh<strong>en</strong>sive set of quality-of-care <strong>in</strong>dicators that are relevant<br />

to vulnerable el<strong>de</strong>rs. 77 About a third of the <strong>in</strong>dicators refer to medication. As part of<br />

the ACOVE project, Knight & Avorn 78 <strong>de</strong>veloped quality <strong>in</strong>dicators for appropriate<br />

medication use <strong>in</strong> vulnerable el<strong>de</strong>rs us<strong>in</strong>g a systematic literature review and expert<br />

panel consi<strong>de</strong>rations. On the basis of the literature review and the authors expertise,<br />

16 pot<strong>en</strong>tial quality <strong>in</strong>dicators were proposed to the expert panel. 12 of them were<br />

judged to be valid.<br />

Elliott et al. 68 <strong>de</strong>veloped a set of <strong>in</strong>dicators of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality for el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> Australian<br />

hospitals. These <strong>in</strong>dicators were based on a set of <strong>in</strong>dicators <strong>de</strong>veloped previously <strong>in</strong><br />

the UK and were piloted at n<strong>in</strong>e Australian hospitals. The <strong>in</strong>dicators were divi<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> 3<br />

groups: 1) summaris<strong>in</strong>g g<strong>en</strong>eral prescrib<strong>in</strong>g activity, 2) assess<strong>in</strong>g prescrib<strong>in</strong>g based on<br />

prescription data only, and 3) assess<strong>in</strong>g prescrib<strong>in</strong>g based on prescription and cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

data. 24 <strong>in</strong>dicators were <strong>de</strong>veloped and applied on the prescriptions of 1,416 pati<strong>en</strong>ts.<br />

Follow<strong>in</strong>g pilot audits, 5 <strong>in</strong>dicators were <strong>de</strong>leted, result<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a f<strong>in</strong>al set of 19 <strong>in</strong>dicators.<br />

The review of prescription by 2 pharmacists (n=66) showed also a good <strong>in</strong>ter-rate<br />

reliability. The <strong>de</strong>veloped <strong>in</strong>dicators provi<strong>de</strong> a tool that can be used to assess, monitor,<br />

b<strong>en</strong>chmark and improve prescrib<strong>in</strong>g for the age.<br />

Oborne et al. 79 aimed to modify previously <strong>de</strong>veloped <strong>in</strong>dicators and algorithms from<br />

the hospital sett<strong>in</strong>g for use <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, and to apply these <strong>in</strong>dicators <strong>in</strong> the<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home sett<strong>in</strong>g. 13 <strong>in</strong>dicators were successfully modified and applied on 934<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> 22 nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes <strong>in</strong> the UK. These objective, evi<strong>de</strong>nce-based and simple to<br />

use prescrib<strong>in</strong>g appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess criteria provi<strong>de</strong> an objective audit tool that can be of<br />

use <strong>in</strong> compar<strong>in</strong>g prescrib<strong>in</strong>g betwe<strong>en</strong> units and to <strong>en</strong>hance prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality.<br />

A remark on outcomes<br />

The above <strong>de</strong>scribed sets of quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g are all measures of the quality of<br />

process to achieve better outcome among pati<strong>en</strong>ts. They are not direct measures of<br />

outcome such as mortality, morbidity, hospital admissions, or quality of life. Few studies<br />

on <strong>in</strong>appropriate prescrib<strong>in</strong>g look directly at health outcomes. Only prelim<strong>in</strong>ary<br />

attempts to l<strong>in</strong>k outcomes, measured by the Resi<strong>de</strong>nt Assessm<strong>en</strong>t Instrum<strong>en</strong>t with drug<br />

utilization data, have be<strong>en</strong> published. 80, 81 The measurem<strong>en</strong>t of quality of life may be<br />

difficult to measure with g<strong>en</strong>eric <strong>in</strong>strum<strong>en</strong>ts, giv<strong>en</strong> the high preval<strong>en</strong>ce of cognitive<br />

disabilities and disabilities of the s<strong>en</strong>ses.<br />

2.3.4 Which <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics are important for the quality of<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g?<br />

The organizational characteristics of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes can substantially <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ce the<br />

quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. This chapter will give an overview of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home characteristics and their impact upon quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g (expressed by volume,<br />

exp<strong>en</strong>ditures and appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g). Only studies explicitly explor<strong>in</strong>g the<br />

relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics and quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g are listed.<br />

We exam<strong>in</strong>ed the follow<strong>in</strong>g characteristics:<br />

Size and type of the <strong>in</strong>stitution<br />

Case-mix of the <strong>in</strong>stitution<br />

Staff<strong>in</strong>g with<strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>stitution


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 37<br />

G<strong>en</strong>eral approach to managem<strong>en</strong>t of care processes<br />

Approach to medication managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

2.3.4.1 Size and type of the <strong>in</strong>stitution (public, private not-for-profit, private for profit)<br />

2.3.4.2 Case-mix<br />

2.3.4.3 Staff<strong>in</strong>g<br />

There is some evi<strong>de</strong>nce that organizational factors can have a significant impact on both<br />

the quantity and quality of psychotropic drug use <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. However, the<br />

relationships are complex and poorly un<strong>de</strong>rstood. A few studies found higher rates of<br />

drug use <strong>in</strong> larger facilities and for-profit facilities, but other studies found that facility<br />

size and ownership had no effect. 82-86<br />

In the sample of Schmidt et al., 86 all nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes were non-profit and operated by<br />

public municipalities and there was no functional differ<strong>en</strong>ce <strong>in</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ancial status among the<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts -all were covered by the Swedish universal health care <strong>in</strong>surance plan.<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nts' cl<strong>in</strong>ical and <strong>de</strong>mographic characteristics did not account for variations of drug<br />

use from one facility to another, suggest<strong>in</strong>g that facility differ<strong>en</strong>ces are not due simply to<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt mix.<br />

Mylotte et al. 87 <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>ed significant correlations betwe<strong>en</strong> the antibiotic use and cost<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicators, overall <strong>in</strong>fection rate and case-mix <strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>x at the facility level, betwe<strong>en</strong> 11<br />

long-term care facilities (USA). There was no correlation betwe<strong>en</strong> the CMI of the RUGs<br />

II system as a measure of functional status and <strong>in</strong>fection rate. Nevertheless, there was a<br />

tr<strong>en</strong>d toward a significant correlation betwe<strong>en</strong> mean facility CMI and mean facility<br />

<strong>in</strong>ci<strong>de</strong>nce of antibiotic use (AUR antibiotic utilization ratio), and cost per RCD (resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

care day).<br />

Shorr et al. 88 found more ext<strong>en</strong>sive antipsychotic drug use <strong>in</strong> those T<strong>en</strong>nessee homes<br />

with poorer third-shift staff<strong>in</strong>g. Svarstad et al. 89 used a more ref<strong>in</strong>ed measure of home<br />

staff<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> their study of private- and public-pay resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> Wiscons<strong>in</strong> homes. As<br />

predicted, resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> homes with less a<strong>de</strong>quate nurse staff<strong>in</strong>g and resources were<br />

more likely to have an or<strong>de</strong>r for an antipsychotic or anxiolytic medication, more likely<br />

to receive such medications, and more likely to have <strong>in</strong>appropriate use, ev<strong>en</strong> after<br />

controll<strong>in</strong>g for resi<strong>de</strong>nts' cl<strong>in</strong>ical and <strong>de</strong>mographic characteristics. The hypotheses<br />

suggest that home differ<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> drug use are due largely to organizational factors such<br />

as: resource availability and <strong>de</strong>mand (low/high nurse staff<strong>in</strong>g; low/high resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

function<strong>in</strong>g); caregiver communication (pres<strong>en</strong>ce/abs<strong>en</strong>ce of <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion team<br />

meet<strong>in</strong>gs); facility size (small/large number of beds; reflect<strong>in</strong>g a measure of <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

<strong>en</strong>vironm<strong>en</strong>t).<br />

Mull<strong>in</strong>s et al. 90 exam<strong>in</strong>ed nurs<strong>in</strong>g home personnel's perceptions of pati<strong>en</strong>t autonomy <strong>in</strong><br />

their home. F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>in</strong>dicated staff members' education and race had the greatest effect<br />

on their perceptions of personal autonomy. Somewhat surpris<strong>in</strong>gly, staff<strong>in</strong>g levels,<br />

turnover rates, and restra<strong>in</strong>t usage did not affect their views of autonomy ( whether the<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt would be allowed to make his or her own <strong>de</strong>cisions or whether the nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home staff would <strong>de</strong>ci<strong>de</strong> for the resi<strong>de</strong>nt ).<br />

Schnelle et al. 38 compared nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes that report differ<strong>en</strong>t staff<strong>in</strong>g statistics on<br />

quality of care. Staff <strong>in</strong> the highest staffed homes (California), accord<strong>in</strong>g to state cost<br />

reports, reported significantly lower resi<strong>de</strong>nt care loads dur<strong>in</strong>g onsite <strong>in</strong>terviews across<br />

day and ev<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g shifts (7.6 resi<strong>de</strong>nts per nurse ai<strong>de</strong> [NA]) compared to the rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes that reported betwe<strong>en</strong> 9 to 10 resi<strong>de</strong>nts per NA). The highest-staffed homes<br />

performed significantly better on 13 of 16 care processes implem<strong>en</strong>ted by NAs<br />

compared to lower-staffed homes.<br />

Castle et al. 91 exam<strong>in</strong>ed the association betwe<strong>en</strong> nurse ai<strong>de</strong> (NA) plus lic<strong>en</strong>sed practical<br />

nurse (LPN) and registered nurse (RN) turnover and quality <strong>in</strong>dicators <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes. Indicators of care quality used are the rates of physical restra<strong>in</strong>t use, catheter<br />

use, contractures, pressure ulcers, psychoactive drug use, and certification survey


38 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

quality of care <strong>de</strong>fici<strong>en</strong>cies. In addition, they used a quality <strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>x comb<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g these<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicators. Turnover <strong>in</strong>formation came from primary data collected from 354 facilities <strong>in</strong><br />

4 states and other <strong>in</strong>formation came from the 2003 Onl<strong>in</strong>e Survey, Certification and<br />

Report<strong>in</strong>g data (OSCAR). The turnover rates were grouped <strong>in</strong>to 3 categories, low,<br />

medium, and high, <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed as 0% to 20%, 21% to 50%, and greater than 50% turnover,<br />

respectively. The average 1-year turnover rates i<strong>de</strong>ntified <strong>in</strong> this study were high at<br />

85.8% for NAs and LPNs and 55.4% for RNs. Multivariate analysis showed that<br />

<strong>de</strong>creases <strong>in</strong> quality are associated with <strong>in</strong>creases <strong>in</strong> RN turnover, especially <strong>in</strong>creases<br />

from low-to-mo<strong>de</strong>rate levels of turnover, and with <strong>in</strong>creases <strong>in</strong> NA and LPN turnover,<br />

especially <strong>in</strong>creases from mo<strong>de</strong>rate-to-high levels of turnover. These f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs are<br />

significant because the belief that staff turnover <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ces quality is pervasive. The<br />

cross-sectional results are only able to show associations, nonetheless, few empirical<br />

studies <strong>in</strong> the literature have shown this relationship.<br />

2.3.4.4 G<strong>en</strong>eral approach to managem<strong>en</strong>t of care processes<br />

Increas<strong>in</strong>gly, health care provi<strong>de</strong>rs are acknowledg<strong>in</strong>g that organizational culture is<br />

crucial to un<strong>de</strong>rstand<strong>in</strong>g and manag<strong>in</strong>g the complex <strong>de</strong>mands of a health care<br />

organization. The <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ition of organizational culture may <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> the social climate,<br />

quality of communication among staff, and <strong>in</strong>formal values, norms, beliefs and attitu<strong>de</strong>s<br />

shared by members of the organization. It has be<strong>en</strong> shown that an organizational culture<br />

based on a teamwork approach (as opposed to a traditional hierarchy of authority) can<br />

significantly improve pati<strong>en</strong>t outcomes. 92<br />

Co-ord<strong>in</strong>ation of care can be consi<strong>de</strong>red as one of the three dim<strong>en</strong>sions of quality of<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g care <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. The other two dim<strong>en</strong>sions are <strong>in</strong>strum<strong>en</strong>tal care and the<br />

quality of the social climate and liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong>vironm<strong>en</strong>t. In this concept, co-ord<strong>in</strong>ation of<br />

care is one of the aspects of quality of care.<br />

Holtkamp et al. 93 <strong>in</strong>vestigated the quality of co-ord<strong>in</strong>ation of care and the way it is<br />

related to gaps betwe<strong>en</strong> needs and care supply, the quality of life and health status of<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> Dutch nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. The results of this <strong>in</strong>vestigation showed a<br />

relation betwe<strong>en</strong> the co-ord<strong>in</strong>ation of care and care discrepancies; the higher the quality<br />

of co-ord<strong>in</strong>ation of care, the fewer the gaps betwe<strong>en</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>nts' needs and the care they<br />

received. The psycho-social aspects <strong>in</strong> particular showed a gap betwe<strong>en</strong> the needs and<br />

care supply. As regards the relation betwe<strong>en</strong> co-ord<strong>in</strong>ation of care and quality of life,<br />

the strongest positive relations were found betwe<strong>en</strong> tak<strong>in</strong>g case histories, pati<strong>en</strong>t<br />

allocation and dim<strong>en</strong>sions of quality of life. No direct relations were found betwe<strong>en</strong> the<br />

co-ord<strong>in</strong>ation of care and care discrepancies on the one hand and the health status of<br />

the resi<strong>de</strong>nts on the other. In conclusion, this study showed that the quality of coord<strong>in</strong>ation<br />

of care can affect the perceived quality of life of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts. The<br />

relation is ev<strong>en</strong> stronger wh<strong>en</strong> the unmet needs of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts are also tak<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>to<br />

account. To meet the resi<strong>de</strong>nts' needs it is important to assess their physical and<br />

psycho-social needs accurately. An <strong>in</strong>tegrated <strong>in</strong>strum<strong>en</strong>t such as the Resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

Assessm<strong>en</strong>t Instrum<strong>en</strong>t (RAI) <strong>in</strong> which the physical and psycho-social assessm<strong>en</strong>t<br />

procedures are both repres<strong>en</strong>ted may help nurses to complete the assessm<strong>en</strong>t of<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts needs. In a review Wagner et al. 94 i<strong>de</strong>ntified 21 empirical studies concern<strong>in</strong>g<br />

quality system activities such as the implem<strong>en</strong>tation of gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es; provid<strong>in</strong>g feedback on<br />

outcomes; assessm<strong>en</strong>t of the needs of resi<strong>de</strong>nts by means of care plann<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>in</strong>ternal<br />

audits and tuition and an ombudsman for resi<strong>de</strong>nts. The effects on care processes and<br />

the health outcomes of long term care resi<strong>de</strong>nts were <strong>in</strong>consist<strong>en</strong>t, but there was some<br />

evi<strong>de</strong>nce that specific tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es can <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ce the outcomes at the pati<strong>en</strong>t<br />

level. The <strong>de</strong>sign of most of the studies meant that it was not possible to attribute the<br />

results <strong>en</strong>tirely to the newly implem<strong>en</strong>ted quality system.<br />

A nurs<strong>in</strong>g home that creates a culture that supports op<strong>en</strong> communication and<br />

relationships, based on t<strong>rust</strong>, respect, and lea<strong>de</strong>rship, <strong>en</strong>sures that staff members have<br />

the <strong>en</strong>vironm<strong>en</strong>t and resources to make and susta<strong>in</strong> improvem<strong>en</strong>t. 95 However<br />

communication and relationships rema<strong>in</strong> a concern, with more than 50% of staff<br />

suggest<strong>in</strong>g that communication is not op<strong>en</strong>, accurate, timely, or un<strong>de</strong>rstandable.<br />

Although less has be<strong>en</strong> learned about managem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>frastructure, there is no question<br />

that traditional managem<strong>en</strong>t practices also s<strong>en</strong>d mixed messages and do not support an


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 39<br />

<strong>en</strong>vironm<strong>en</strong>t where high-perform<strong>in</strong>g teams feel confi<strong>de</strong>nt and supported. Information<br />

mastery is an evolv<strong>in</strong>g skill <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home sett<strong>in</strong>g with high perform<strong>in</strong>g teams<br />

need<strong>in</strong>g access to <strong>in</strong>formation, guidance <strong>in</strong> how to process <strong>in</strong>formation, and the ability<br />

to make an impact once they have used this <strong>in</strong>formation to fuel quality improvem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

efforts. Nurse lea<strong>de</strong>rs must carefully assess their personal preparation and<br />

un<strong>de</strong>rstand<strong>in</strong>g how they do partner with their adm<strong>in</strong>istrators and other key lea<strong>de</strong>rs to<br />

create an <strong>en</strong>vironm<strong>en</strong>t that supports and values the voice of staff and the use of high<br />

perform<strong>in</strong>g teams as the ma<strong>in</strong> <strong>en</strong>g<strong>in</strong>e of improvem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> their nurs<strong>in</strong>g home. This<br />

susta<strong>in</strong>ed improvem<strong>en</strong>t will <strong>en</strong>sure the best possible care of the frailest citiz<strong>en</strong>s for<br />

years to come.<br />

Some <strong>in</strong>stitutions have a culture of <strong>in</strong>accurate docum<strong>en</strong>tation, oft<strong>en</strong> created by a<br />

discrepancy betwe<strong>en</strong> care expectations placed on nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes by regulatory<br />

gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es and <strong>in</strong>a<strong>de</strong>quate reimbursem<strong>en</strong>t to fulfil these expectations. Nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

staff has little <strong>in</strong>c<strong>en</strong>tive to implem<strong>en</strong>t the technologies necessary to audit and assure<br />

data quality if accurate docum<strong>en</strong>tation reveals that care consist<strong>en</strong>t with regulatory<br />

gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es is not or cannot be provi<strong>de</strong>d. Schnelle et al. 38 reviewed methods to improve<br />

the accuracy of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home medical record docum<strong>en</strong>tation and to create data systems<br />

useful for staff tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and managem<strong>en</strong>t.<br />

I<strong>de</strong>ntification of resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care as a separate quality doma<strong>in</strong> is important conceptually<br />

and pragmatically. Conceptually, it acknowledges the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home as the resi<strong>de</strong>nt s<br />

home and the consequ<strong>en</strong>t importance of the ongo<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>teraction betwe<strong>en</strong> care<br />

provi<strong>de</strong>rs and resi<strong>de</strong>nts. It also dist<strong>in</strong>guishes resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care as a key factor among the<br />

many that <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>e resi<strong>de</strong>nts quality of life. The <strong>in</strong>teractions of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home staff<br />

with resi<strong>de</strong>nts powerfully <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>e resi<strong>de</strong>nts quality of life. The resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care<br />

process measures <strong>de</strong>veloped by Saliba et al. 96 are <strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d to measure the manner <strong>in</strong><br />

which, or the ext<strong>en</strong>t to which, need is met on a day-to-day basis. Experts i<strong>de</strong>ntified<br />

19 specific care processes as valid and important measures of the quality of nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care. N<strong>in</strong>e of these quality <strong>in</strong>dicators may be measured best by direct<br />

observation of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home care, rather than by <strong>in</strong>terviews or review of exist<strong>in</strong>g<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home records. Almost half of the quality <strong>in</strong>dicators were viewed as<br />

discrim<strong>in</strong>at<strong>in</strong>g betwe<strong>en</strong> better and average nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.<br />

Pressure ulcers, a preval<strong>en</strong>t healthcare problem <strong>in</strong> long-term care homes are useful<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicators of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home quality. Pressure ulcers are associated with consi<strong>de</strong>rable<br />

morbidity, mortality, and cost. In addition, nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes with high pressure ulcer<br />

preval<strong>en</strong>ce are likely to have problems with other quality measures. I<strong>de</strong>ntify<strong>in</strong>g LTC<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts who are at risk for pressure ulcers is important because the C<strong>en</strong>ters for<br />

Medicare and Medicaid Services consi<strong>de</strong>r a pressure ulcer to be a s<strong>en</strong>t<strong>in</strong>el ev<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong><br />

someone who has be<strong>en</strong> assessed as low risk. Although researchers have exam<strong>in</strong>ed sk<strong>in</strong><br />

conditions us<strong>in</strong>g the MDS, the relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> risk assessm<strong>en</strong>t and pressure ulcer<br />

quality <strong>in</strong>dicator scores from the MDS has not be<strong>en</strong> evaluated. Wipke-Tevis et al. 97<br />

measured pressure ulcer quality <strong>in</strong>dicator scores and pressure ulcer prev<strong>en</strong>tion and<br />

treatm<strong>en</strong>t practices <strong>in</strong> long-term care facilities <strong>in</strong> Missouri. Fewer than 13% of homes<br />

used the Ag<strong>en</strong>cy for Health Care Policy and Research pressure ulcer prev<strong>en</strong>tion and<br />

treatm<strong>en</strong>t gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es. No relationship was found betwe<strong>en</strong> the number of prev<strong>en</strong>tion<br />

strategies or the number of treatm<strong>en</strong>t strategies and the pressure ulcer quality <strong>in</strong>dicator<br />

scores. Valid and reliable pressure ulcer risk assessm<strong>en</strong>t tools are seriously un<strong>de</strong>rused.<br />

Evi<strong>de</strong>nce-based pressure ulcer prev<strong>en</strong>tion and treatm<strong>en</strong>t gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es appear to be rarely<br />

implem<strong>en</strong>ted. This study provi<strong>de</strong>s a basis for <strong>de</strong>velop<strong>in</strong>g educational and quality<br />

improvem<strong>en</strong>t programs.<br />

Excessive time <strong>in</strong> bed has negative effects on both physical condition<strong>in</strong>g and function<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

There are no data or practice gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es relevant to how nurses should manage the <strong>in</strong>bed<br />

times of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts, although all nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes receive a bedfast<br />

preval<strong>en</strong>ce quality <strong>in</strong>dicator report g<strong>en</strong>erated from the M<strong>in</strong>imum Data Set. Bates-J<strong>en</strong>s<strong>en</strong><br />

et al. 98 found significant differ<strong>en</strong>ces betwe<strong>en</strong> upper (i.e., higher preval<strong>en</strong>ce of bedfast<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts) and lower quartile nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes <strong>in</strong> the proportion of time resi<strong>de</strong>nts were<br />

observed <strong>in</strong> bed (43% vs. 34%, respectively; p =.007), and <strong>in</strong> the proportion of resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

who sp<strong>en</strong>t more than 22 hours <strong>in</strong> bed per day (18% vs. 8%, respectively; p =.002). All<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes un<strong>de</strong>restimated the number of bedfast resi<strong>de</strong>nts. The resi<strong>de</strong>nts of upper


40 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

quartile homes showed more activity episo<strong>de</strong>s and reported receiv<strong>in</strong>g more walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

assistance than the resi<strong>de</strong>nts of lower quartile homes. M<strong>in</strong>imum Data Set bedfast quality<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicator i<strong>de</strong>ntified nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes <strong>in</strong> which resi<strong>de</strong>nts sp<strong>en</strong>t more time <strong>in</strong> bed, but did<br />

not reflect differ<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> activity and mobility care. In fact, upper quartile homes<br />

provi<strong>de</strong>d more activity and mobility care than lower quartile homes. Across all the<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, most of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts sp<strong>en</strong>t at least 17 hours a day <strong>in</strong> bed. Further study<br />

of activity and mobility care and bedfast outcomes <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes is nee<strong>de</strong>d, and<br />

nurses need to note the amount of time nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts sp<strong>en</strong>d <strong>in</strong> bed.<br />

Wagner et al. 99 <strong>de</strong>scribed a method for measur<strong>in</strong>g and report<strong>in</strong>g the costs of quality<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> a national survey <strong>in</strong> 489 organizations provid<strong>in</strong>g long-term care (nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes, home health care organizations, and homes for the el<strong>de</strong>rly). Site visits and a<br />

questionnaire were used to measure the exist<strong>en</strong>ce of quality managem<strong>en</strong>t activities and<br />

<strong>in</strong>vestigate the costs per quality managem<strong>en</strong>t activity <strong>in</strong> more <strong>de</strong>tail. Health care<br />

organizations differ<strong>en</strong>tiate betwe<strong>en</strong> regular activities and quality managem<strong>en</strong>t activities.<br />

The costs of quality managem<strong>en</strong>t activities were found to vary betwe<strong>en</strong> 0.3% and 3.5%<br />

of the budget <strong>in</strong> three nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. An extrapolation of the costs of quality<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t activities to the <strong>en</strong>tire sector shows that the long-term care sector sp<strong>en</strong>t<br />

betwe<strong>en</strong> 0.8% and 3.5% of the overall budget for quality managem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> 1999. The costs<br />

of <strong>de</strong>velop<strong>in</strong>g and implem<strong>en</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g quality managem<strong>en</strong>t activities are higher than the costs<br />

of monitor<strong>in</strong>g. Most long-term care organizations have no <strong>in</strong>sight <strong>in</strong>to failure costs (i.e.<br />

the costs of quality <strong>de</strong>viations). This makes it impossible for health care organizations to<br />

draw conclusions about the cost-effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess of quality managem<strong>en</strong>t. Un<strong>de</strong>rstand<strong>in</strong>g<br />

how quality improvem<strong>en</strong>t affects costs is important. Lee et al. 100 built on the pr<strong>in</strong>ciples<br />

of process improvem<strong>en</strong>t to <strong>de</strong>velop a cost<strong>in</strong>g strategy. Process-based cost<strong>in</strong>g has<br />

4 steps: <strong>de</strong>velop<strong>in</strong>g a flowchart, estimat<strong>in</strong>g resource use, valu<strong>in</strong>g resources, and<br />

calculat<strong>in</strong>g direct costs. The researchers conclu<strong>de</strong> that process-based cost<strong>in</strong>g is easy to<br />

implem<strong>en</strong>t, g<strong>en</strong>erates reliable, valid data and allows nurs<strong>in</strong>g managers to assess the costs<br />

of new or modified processes.<br />

F<strong>in</strong>ally, there are some <strong>in</strong>dications <strong>in</strong> the literature that there is a positive relationship<br />

betwe<strong>en</strong> the level of subsidiz<strong>in</strong>g or paym<strong>en</strong>t rate of the <strong>in</strong>stitution and the quality of<br />

processes and better outcomes <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. 101 The results from this analysis imply<br />

that a 10 perc<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> Medicaid paym<strong>en</strong>t was associated with a 1.5 perc<strong>en</strong>t<br />

<strong>de</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>ci<strong>de</strong>nce of risk-adjusted pressure ulcers. These f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs provi<strong>de</strong><br />

support for the i<strong>de</strong>a that <strong>in</strong>creased reimbursem<strong>en</strong>t may be an effective means toward<br />

improv<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g home quality.<br />

2.3.4.5 Approach to medication managem<strong>en</strong>t systems<br />

Differ<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>itiatives have be<strong>en</strong> tak<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> or<strong>de</strong>r to manage the quality of the drug<br />

consumption <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. We will review the literature on approaches to improve<br />

the quality of drug consumption <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes:<br />

The implem<strong>en</strong>tation of drug formularies<br />

Organization of the medication distribution<br />

Informatization of this medication distribution process<br />

Pharmaceutical care <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

An example of a quality managem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion: multidiscipl<strong>in</strong>ary<br />

case confer<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

In the next section we will review the literature on the evaluation of the effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess of<br />

these approaches to <strong>en</strong>hance the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Medication managem<strong>en</strong>t is closely related to other cl<strong>in</strong>ical activities such as scre<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

activities (see the sections on cl<strong>in</strong>ical assessm<strong>en</strong>t) and prev<strong>en</strong>tive medic<strong>in</strong>e activities<br />

such as vacc<strong>in</strong>ation. Vacc<strong>in</strong>ations for pneumonia and <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>za are well accepted by<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts and help prev<strong>en</strong>t respiratory tract illness that can lead to hospitalization or<br />

premature <strong>de</strong>ath. On nurs<strong>in</strong>g home admission, the pati<strong>en</strong>t's record of these vacc<strong>in</strong>ations<br />

should be reviewed and diphtheria-tetanus immunization updated. 16


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 41<br />

2.3.5 What is the effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess of <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tions (medication managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

systems) with regard to the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes?<br />

2.3.5.1 Implem<strong>en</strong>tation of formularies <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

Little is known about the implem<strong>en</strong>tation of formularies <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. The<br />

published papers mostly refer to formularies as known <strong>in</strong> the US <strong>in</strong>surance system (the<br />

third-tier does not reimburse all of the drug-related exp<strong>en</strong>ses ma<strong>de</strong>, but only the ones<br />

that refer to the formulary accepted by the <strong>in</strong>surance). On the other hand, geriatric<br />

formularies for nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes are standard lists with affordable, safe and active<br />

medic<strong>in</strong>es for the most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly occurr<strong>in</strong>g diseases. 102 The aim for implem<strong>en</strong>tation of<br />

this k<strong>in</strong>d of formulary can be an <strong>in</strong>creased safety, dispos<strong>in</strong>g of a list of always available<br />

medication, dispos<strong>in</strong>g of a list with the cheapest medication or an evi<strong>de</strong>nce-based<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g behavior.<br />

Drug formularies have long be<strong>en</strong> used and accepted <strong>in</strong> hospitals, but the concept is still<br />

quite new <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. A possible explanation is that nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes lack the<br />

organizational structure and communication systems that would cause the visit<strong>in</strong>g<br />

physicians to meet and discuss an issue as a drug formulary. Therefore, the Pharmacy<br />

Corporation of America (PCA) <strong>de</strong>ci<strong>de</strong>d to offer an op<strong>en</strong> formulary specific to geriatric<br />

population to all medical directors, key att<strong>en</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g physicians and directors of nurs<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

more than 2,000 nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes served by PCA. The formulary is pres<strong>en</strong>ted <strong>in</strong> a<br />

handbook complete with monographs. The monographs display cl<strong>in</strong>ical dos<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation, note fe<strong>de</strong>ral and state nurs<strong>in</strong>g home regulations that apply, and list special<br />

consi<strong>de</strong>rations for geriatric pati<strong>en</strong>ts, such as drug half-time or alternative dosage forms.<br />

PCA consultant pharmacists reported that the formulary served as an excell<strong>en</strong>t start<strong>in</strong>g<br />

po<strong>in</strong>t for <strong>de</strong>velop<strong>in</strong>g a closed, limited formulary. 103<br />

Drug formularies can theoretically <strong>in</strong>crease the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g and reduce the<br />

costs of prescription drug therapy. But Gross 104 found that formularies do not actually<br />

<strong>en</strong>hance the quality of care. Neither do they adversely affect the quality of care, but<br />

more research is required.<br />

Peer-reviewed publications evaluat<strong>in</strong>g the impact of drug formulary use <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes on the cost of care could not be found.<br />

2.3.5.2 Organization of the medication process<br />

Two studies conducted by Gurwitz et al. 105, 106 showed that errors occurred most<br />

commonly at the or<strong>de</strong>r<strong>in</strong>g and monitor<strong>in</strong>g stages of the medication process and less<br />

commonly at the disp<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>g and adm<strong>in</strong>istration stages. Nevertheless, the disp<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istration stages are problematic ess<strong>en</strong>tially for two reasons. Medications can be<br />

split or otherwise altered dur<strong>in</strong>g the disp<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>g stage, and covertly (unknown to the<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt) adm<strong>in</strong>istered. Evi<strong>de</strong>nce shows that both practices are wi<strong>de</strong>spread <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes and are pot<strong>en</strong>tially problematic. 107-110<br />

Medication splitt<strong>in</strong>g or alteration is usually performed by the nurse <strong>in</strong> charge of the<br />

disp<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>g. Ev<strong>en</strong> with appropriate <strong>de</strong>vices, the splitt<strong>in</strong>g practice does not produce equal<br />

halves. 111 112, 113<br />

The dose can <strong>de</strong>viate by more than 20% from the <strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d one.<br />

Inaccurate dos<strong>in</strong>g may result <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>effective disease managem<strong>en</strong>t. 107 Moreover, wh<strong>en</strong><br />

tablets are split or otherwise altered, the effects of specific tablet formulations (such as<br />

<strong>en</strong>teric coated or susta<strong>in</strong>ed release formulations) may be negated and the drugs may be<br />

subject to <strong>in</strong>creased <strong>de</strong>gradation as a result of exposure to air. 111, 114 Therefore,<br />

gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es outl<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g best practice for the alteration and adm<strong>in</strong>istration of medication <strong>in</strong><br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes are required. Accurate and up-to-date <strong>in</strong>formation needs to be available,<br />

<strong>de</strong>tail<strong>in</strong>g those medications which should not be altered, the pot<strong>en</strong>tial risk of alter<strong>in</strong>g<br />

medic<strong>in</strong>es and possible alternatives. 108<br />

Covert adm<strong>in</strong>istration of medications is also common practice <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. But<br />

most concern<strong>in</strong>g are the poor record<strong>in</strong>g and the secrecy around it. 115, 110 The practice is<br />

found to be paternalistic and rarely ethically justifiable. 116 It could be acceptable <strong>in</strong><br />

extreme circumstances, for example if pati<strong>en</strong>ts suffer from perman<strong>en</strong>t m<strong>en</strong>tal <strong>in</strong>capacity


42 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

and refuse nee<strong>de</strong>d treatm<strong>en</strong>t. 115, 117 But disguis<strong>in</strong>g medication simply for the conv<strong>en</strong>i<strong>en</strong>ce<br />

of the healthcare team is totally unacceptable. 118<br />

2.3.5.3 Informatization <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

Prescrib<strong>in</strong>g for el<strong>de</strong>rly people is problematic for numerous reasons. The <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

necessary to g<strong>en</strong>eral practitioners is usually fragm<strong>en</strong>ted across many isolated sources<br />

(differ<strong>en</strong>t specialists, hospitals, nurs<strong>in</strong>g home records) and most records are still paperbased.<br />

Moreover, drug treatm<strong>en</strong>t of el<strong>de</strong>rly is a complex issue requir<strong>in</strong>g dose<br />

adjustm<strong>en</strong>ts, specific att<strong>en</strong>tion for <strong>in</strong>teractions and for the ability of the pati<strong>en</strong>ts to<br />

actually take the medications as prescribed.<br />

A computerized prescription or<strong>de</strong>r <strong>en</strong>try (CPOE) system equipped with a cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

<strong>de</strong>cision support (CDS) module is a pot<strong>en</strong>tially powerful tool to prev<strong>en</strong>t medication<br />

errors. 119 CPOE and CDS systems have already be<strong>en</strong> implem<strong>en</strong>ted successfully <strong>in</strong> a<br />

hospital sett<strong>in</strong>g. However, few <strong>de</strong>scriptions of their use <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes are<br />

120, 121<br />

available.<br />

Evi<strong>de</strong>nce <strong>in</strong>dicated that computer support reduces serious prescrib<strong>in</strong>g errors by 55%<br />

and overall prescrib<strong>in</strong>g errors by about 83%. 122 Also a significant <strong>de</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> medication<br />

error rates was observed. This reduction can be ascribed to the prev<strong>en</strong>tion of errors<br />

and adverse ev<strong>en</strong>ts, the facilitation of a more rapid response after an adverse ev<strong>en</strong>t has<br />

occurred, the track<strong>in</strong>g of adverse ev<strong>en</strong>ts and the provision of feedback about these<br />

adverse ev<strong>en</strong>ts. 123 However, the CPOE system also has several limitations. First of all,<br />

CPOE systems are chall<strong>en</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g to implem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. 124 In or<strong>de</strong>r to facilitate<br />

the overall implem<strong>en</strong>tation of electronic prescrib<strong>in</strong>g, a few improvem<strong>en</strong>ts of the system<br />

are also necessary: the user <strong>in</strong>terface should be adapted, structured drug databases<br />

should be constructed, the system should have the capacity to g<strong>en</strong>erate both criticisms<br />

and suggestions dur<strong>in</strong>g the prescription, and software for retrospective analysis of the<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g habits should be <strong>de</strong>veloped. 119 Medications differ from country to country,<br />

mak<strong>in</strong>g it impossible to just take over an exist<strong>in</strong>g system and implem<strong>en</strong>t it abroad.<br />

Besi<strong>de</strong>s, CPOE systems have be<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong>signed for use <strong>in</strong> adults <strong>in</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eral and need to be<br />

adapted to the specific needs of the geriatric population. 121 Moreover, as CPOE systems<br />

are implem<strong>en</strong>ted, att<strong>en</strong>tion must be paid to the errors that these systems can possibly<br />

cause and not only to the errors that they prev<strong>en</strong>t. 125 For el<strong>de</strong>rly with multiple medical<br />

conditions and polypharmacy, too many unimportant recomm<strong>en</strong>dations are ma<strong>de</strong>, by<br />

126, 127<br />

which important warn<strong>in</strong>gs may be ignored.<br />

In the light of the success <strong>in</strong> hospital sett<strong>in</strong>gs, the implem<strong>en</strong>tation of a CPOE system <strong>in</strong> a<br />

long-term care facility has be<strong>en</strong> studied. These studies agreed that the CPOE system is a<br />

very promis<strong>in</strong>g new technology that may be very useful <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. But a change<br />

<strong>in</strong> m<strong>en</strong>tality and full facility commitm<strong>en</strong>t are nee<strong>de</strong>d to implem<strong>en</strong>t such a major change<br />

126, 128, 129<br />

as the switch to electronic prescrib<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Wh<strong>en</strong>ever organizations f<strong>in</strong>ally <strong>de</strong>ci<strong>de</strong> to take the big step and adopt electronic<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g, they can select from a wi<strong>de</strong> variety of commercial systems. These systems<br />

are oft<strong>en</strong> complex and heterog<strong>en</strong>eous. That is why a conceptual framework for<br />

evaluat<strong>in</strong>g electronic prescrib<strong>in</strong>g systems as <strong>de</strong>veloped for outpati<strong>en</strong>t sett<strong>in</strong>gs by Bell et<br />

al. 130 could be of great help.<br />

Information technologies can also provi<strong>de</strong> a great support dur<strong>in</strong>g the monitor<strong>in</strong>g stages<br />

of the medication process. A computerized monthly drug regim<strong>en</strong> review can help the<br />

pharmacist <strong>in</strong> reduc<strong>in</strong>g the number of medications per pati<strong>en</strong>t, which <strong>in</strong> turn <strong>de</strong>creases<br />

the costs for the resi<strong>de</strong>nts. 131 A computerized system can also <strong>de</strong>tect some adverse<br />

ev<strong>en</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> a timely and cost-effective way. This has ma<strong>in</strong>ly be<strong>en</strong> tested <strong>in</strong> hospital<br />

sett<strong>in</strong>gs, but could also be applied to nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. 132<br />

Another way of prev<strong>en</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g medication errors is the implem<strong>en</strong>tation of a closed loop<br />

system as <strong>de</strong>scribed by L<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r<strong>in</strong>k & Egberts. 133 The ess<strong>en</strong>ce of this system is that at the<br />

mom<strong>en</strong>t of medication adm<strong>in</strong>istration, the medic<strong>in</strong>e that is about to be giv<strong>en</strong> to the<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>t is verified aga<strong>in</strong>st the medication or<strong>de</strong>r with respect to the necessary medic<strong>in</strong>e<br />

characteristics (name, form, dose) and time. In or<strong>de</strong>r to make this possible, automated<br />

bar cod<strong>in</strong>g seems to be the most feasible <strong>in</strong>strum<strong>en</strong>t. This means that there should be a


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 43<br />

specific barco<strong>de</strong> as well on each medic<strong>in</strong>e as on a wristband that each pati<strong>en</strong>t should<br />

wear. A disadvantage is that mobile registration equipm<strong>en</strong>t is nee<strong>de</strong>d. The system was<br />

successfully tested <strong>in</strong> differ<strong>en</strong>t wards of a hospital, and <strong>in</strong> a nurs<strong>in</strong>g home.<br />

2.3.5.4 Pharmaceutical care <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

For a long time, the role of the community pharmacist was purely limited to<br />

compound<strong>in</strong>g, packag<strong>in</strong>g and disp<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>g medications, and advis<strong>in</strong>g about over-thecounter<br />

drugs. Rec<strong>en</strong>tly, this role has evolved, <strong>in</strong> some European countries and ma<strong>in</strong>ly<br />

<strong>in</strong> the US, to become one of pharmaceutical care provi<strong>de</strong>r. The American Society of<br />

Hospital Pharmacists (ASHP) <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>es pharmaceutical care as the direct, responsible<br />

provision of medication-related care for the purpose of achiev<strong>in</strong>g <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ite outcomes that<br />

improve pati<strong>en</strong>t s quality of life . 134 Pharmaceutical care <strong>in</strong>volves pharmacists tak<strong>in</strong>g<br />

responsibility, <strong>in</strong> conjunction with physicians and pati<strong>en</strong>ts, for the outcomes of drug<br />

treatm<strong>en</strong>t and not simply for the accurate disp<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>g of medications. This <strong>in</strong>creased<br />

responsibility would require pharmacists to take a more active role <strong>in</strong> assur<strong>in</strong>g that<br />

therapy is appropriate, that pati<strong>en</strong>ts un<strong>de</strong>rstand regimes, and that therapeutic outcomes<br />

are met. Improv<strong>in</strong>g drug therapy of el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (e.g. by i<strong>de</strong>ntify<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

resolv<strong>in</strong>g and prev<strong>en</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g drug-related problems) could form part of this reori<strong>en</strong>tation of<br />

the pharmacy profession.<br />

Pharmaceutical care was implem<strong>en</strong>ted <strong>in</strong> the USA about 35 years ago. As a result of<br />

<strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g public concern about the overuse of neuroleptics <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, the USgovernm<strong>en</strong>t<br />

passed <strong>in</strong> 1987 the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA-87), a law<br />

creat<strong>in</strong>g a set of national m<strong>in</strong>imum standards of care and rights for people liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

certified nurs<strong>in</strong>g facilities. One of the changes OBRA-87 brought to nurs<strong>in</strong>g home care<br />

was a mandatory monthly medication regim<strong>en</strong> review performed by a consultant<br />

pharmacist. But already before 1987, the effects of a drug regim<strong>en</strong> review were<br />

<strong>in</strong>vestigated. Cooper 135 showed that the consultant pharmacist had an effect on drug<br />

costs <strong>in</strong> long-term care, which was reversed wh<strong>en</strong> the drug regim<strong>en</strong> review was<br />

removed and r<strong>en</strong>ewed wh<strong>en</strong> services were re<strong>in</strong>itiated. The provi<strong>de</strong>d pharmaceutical<br />

care also frequ<strong>en</strong>tly <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d advice to GPs about choice and duration of drug therapy,<br />

as well as the participation <strong>in</strong> staff education about medication.<br />

In Europe (except <strong>in</strong> the UK), pharmaceutical care services are not so wi<strong>de</strong>spread. The<br />

services provi<strong>de</strong>d to nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes are primary the disp<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>g of medication and the<br />

136, 137<br />

provision of basic advice about docum<strong>en</strong>tation and storage.<br />

Differ<strong>en</strong>t studies have explored what pot<strong>en</strong>tial roles of a pharmacist can be. Pharmacists<br />

can promote safer prescrib<strong>in</strong>g practices, provi<strong>de</strong> additional <strong>in</strong>formation to the nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home staff, and i<strong>de</strong>ntify pot<strong>en</strong>tial adverse drug reactions and <strong>in</strong>teractions. Some<br />

community pharmacists provi<strong>de</strong> pharmaceutical advice and services to resi<strong>de</strong>ntial and<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes such as the managem<strong>en</strong>t of repeat prescriptions and the monitor<strong>in</strong>g of<br />

treatm<strong>en</strong>t. But they also can assist GPs with medication reviews, provi<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation to<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g committees and compile drug formularies. 138 Crotty et al. 139 assessed the<br />

effects of a pharmacist as transition coord<strong>in</strong>ator for transfers from a hospital to a longterm<br />

care facility. The use of a pharmacist as transition coord<strong>in</strong>ator improved the<br />

appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess of medication use across health sectors. Therefore, pharmacists should<br />

not restra<strong>in</strong> their activities to what happ<strong>en</strong>s <strong>in</strong>si<strong>de</strong> the walls of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home.<br />

Most studies are very positive about the effects of pharmaceutical care provi<strong>de</strong>d to<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. Drug use <strong>de</strong>creases, which results <strong>in</strong> a <strong>de</strong>crease of the costs for both<br />

the resi<strong>de</strong>nts and the governm<strong>en</strong>t, without affect<strong>in</strong>g the morbidity or mortality of the<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts. 140-144 However, one should be careful with the <strong>in</strong>terpretation of such results.<br />

Majumdar & Soumerai 145 argue that the oft<strong>en</strong> chos<strong>en</strong> goal of reduction of the number of<br />

prescribed medication is misdirected. It should actually be abandoned as a measure of<br />

quality, s<strong>in</strong>ce un<strong>de</strong>ruse of medication and un<strong>de</strong>rtreatm<strong>en</strong>t are also common <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes. In this case, the pharmacist s <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion does not <strong>in</strong>crease the number of<br />

prescribed drugs (which would be <strong>in</strong>terpreted as a negative result), but does <strong>in</strong>crease<br />

the quality of care. Harjivan & Lyles 146 state that although the purpose of monthly drug<br />

regim<strong>en</strong> reviews is to improve drug use and to avoid adverse drug ev<strong>en</strong>ts, the curr<strong>en</strong>t<br />

gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es focus on a limited selection of medications and <strong>in</strong>dications rather than on


44 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>t outcomes. Therefore, the pharmacist s role should be more one of a cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

pharmacist than of a simple consultant pharmacist.<br />

But not all studies are positive about the effects of pharmaceutical care. A randomised<br />

controlled trial <strong>in</strong> primary care showed that the pharmacist <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion did not have a<br />

significant effect on pati<strong>en</strong>t outcomes. 147 A study by Crotty et al. 148 focused on stroke<br />

prev<strong>en</strong>tion and fall reduction rather than on a <strong>de</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> medication use. This study<br />

showed no change <strong>in</strong> prescrib<strong>in</strong>g patterns of the GPs, ev<strong>en</strong> if they were receptive to the<br />

i<strong>de</strong>a of pharmaceutical care.<br />

Briesacher et al. 149 argue that the effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess of drug use reviews <strong>in</strong> improv<strong>in</strong>g pati<strong>en</strong>t<br />

safety <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes is actually unclear, ev<strong>en</strong> though state and fe<strong>de</strong>ral ag<strong>en</strong>cies <strong>in</strong> the<br />

USA have wi<strong>de</strong>ly adopted this strategy.<br />

2.3.5.5 Multidiscipl<strong>in</strong>ary case confer<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (an example of a quality<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion)<br />

Pharmacists can not improve the quality of medication use <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes all by<br />

themselves. 150 Collaboration betwe<strong>en</strong> differ<strong>en</strong>t healthcare provi<strong>de</strong>rs and nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

staff is required <strong>in</strong> or<strong>de</strong>r to modify suboptimal drug use <strong>in</strong> ol<strong>de</strong>r people. 151 The quality<br />

of drug use is <strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>ed positively associated with the quality of communication betwe<strong>en</strong><br />

138, 152<br />

healthcare provi<strong>de</strong>rs.<br />

Multidiscipl<strong>in</strong>ary teams seem to be useful for various aspects of the care process. The<br />

teams reduce the number of <strong>in</strong>appropriate medications, <strong>de</strong>crease the number of<br />

medication or<strong>de</strong>rs and <strong>in</strong>crease the staff knowledge about drug therapy <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly.<br />

The composition of those teams is not a constant and varies from nurs<strong>in</strong>g home to<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home. However, GPs, a pharmacist and nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff are almost always <strong>in</strong>volved.<br />

But the team can also <strong>in</strong>volve physicians specialized <strong>in</strong> a specific area (geriatrician,<br />

neurologist, neuro-psychiatrist, cl<strong>in</strong>ical pharmacologist, ) or other members of the<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home healthcare team (dietitian, <strong>de</strong>ntist, rehabilitation therapist, social worker,<br />

activities coord<strong>in</strong>ator), sometimes un<strong>de</strong>r the supervision of the managem<strong>en</strong>t. 153<br />

These multidiscipl<strong>in</strong>ary teams meet on a regular basis <strong>in</strong> or<strong>de</strong>r to discuss the differ<strong>en</strong>t<br />

aspects of care for the el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home, or the medication <strong>in</strong> particular.<br />

Medication errors or <strong>in</strong>appropriate medication use can thus be i<strong>de</strong>ntified.<br />

Most studies showed positive results on the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g, and thus b<strong>en</strong>efits for<br />

the resi<strong>de</strong>nts. 86, 154, 49, 155, 152, 156-158 One study was rather sceptical because <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tions<br />

with a multi-speciality group showed no effect other than the <strong>de</strong>crease of the number<br />

of prescribed drugs. 153 However, no negative results were found.<br />

2.3.5.6 Chang<strong>in</strong>g organizational culture<br />

Svarstad et al. 159 hypothesized that reduction <strong>in</strong> use of antipsychotic drugs was more<br />

likely to occur <strong>in</strong> homes with a resi<strong>de</strong>nt-c<strong>en</strong>tered culture emphasiz<strong>in</strong>g psychosocial care,<br />

avoidance of psychotropic drugs, pharmacist feedback, and <strong>in</strong>volvem<strong>en</strong>t of m<strong>en</strong>tal health<br />

workers. In this study, they exam<strong>in</strong>ed four types of factors that can <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ce an<br />

organization s ability or motivation to change: need, structure, capacity, and culture. The<br />

results of the study suggested that homes with higher reimbursem<strong>en</strong>t and stable nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

lea<strong>de</strong>rship are more responsive to new drug gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es. How do these factors actually<br />

<strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ce a home s response? One obvious hypothesis is that better fund<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

lea<strong>de</strong>rship produce better nurse staff<strong>in</strong>g, which is ess<strong>en</strong>tial for improv<strong>in</strong>g care. In<br />

addition, directors of nurs<strong>in</strong>g with longer t<strong>en</strong>ure may acquire the experi<strong>en</strong>ce or<br />

legitimacy nee<strong>de</strong>d to i<strong>de</strong>ntify appropriate tools, mobilize staff, and facilitate<br />

communication betwe<strong>en</strong> nurses and other provi<strong>de</strong>rs.<br />

Schmidt et al. 152 explored the impact of the quality of nurse physician communication on<br />

the quality of psychotropic drug use <strong>in</strong> Swedish nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, while controll<strong>in</strong>g for<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt mix and other nurs<strong>in</strong>g home characteristics. The quality of drug use was<br />

positively associated with the quality of nurse physician communication and with regular<br />

multidiscipl<strong>in</strong>ary team discussions address<strong>in</strong>g drug therapy and negatively associated<br />

with preval<strong>en</strong>ce of behavioral disturbances among resi<strong>de</strong>nts. Facility size, level of


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 45<br />

staff<strong>in</strong>g, resi<strong>de</strong>nt s diagnostic mix, and <strong>de</strong>mographic mix were unrelated to the two drug<br />

quality measures.<br />

Manias et al. 160 exam<strong>in</strong>ed the ext<strong>en</strong>t of adher<strong>en</strong>ce to various protocols <strong>in</strong> relation to<br />

medication activities and <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>ed how the ward <strong>en</strong>vironm<strong>en</strong>t impacts on graduate<br />

nurses use of protocols to manage pati<strong>en</strong>ts medications. Such protocols <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d<br />

guid<strong>in</strong>g statem<strong>en</strong>ts for prepar<strong>in</strong>g medication for adm<strong>in</strong>istration, assess<strong>in</strong>g pati<strong>en</strong>ts before<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>ister<strong>in</strong>g medication, check<strong>in</strong>g the pati<strong>en</strong>t s i<strong>de</strong>ntity before giv<strong>in</strong>g medication, the<br />

process for adm<strong>in</strong>ister<strong>in</strong>g medication, evaluat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>de</strong>sired and adverse effects, check<strong>in</strong>g<br />

specific medications with other nurses before giv<strong>in</strong>g and the <strong>de</strong>sired times of day to<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>ister medication. The study showed that graduate nurses adhered to protocols if<br />

they were perceived not to impe<strong>de</strong> with other nurs<strong>in</strong>g activities; were more likely to<br />

follow protocols if they felt <strong>en</strong>couraged to make their own <strong>de</strong>cisions effective and<br />

safe medication managem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>volves creat<strong>in</strong>g the appropriate balance betwe<strong>en</strong><br />

standardiz<strong>in</strong>g practice <strong>in</strong> protocols and allow<strong>in</strong>g flexibility and autonomy to take<br />

responsibility -; were reluctant to follow protocols about docum<strong>en</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g medication<br />

errors if there was a likelihood that discipl<strong>in</strong>ary action would be <strong>in</strong>volved.<br />

A special study report from the UK Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI 112<br />

February 2006) revisited the managem<strong>en</strong>t of medication to f<strong>in</strong>d out whether homes had<br />

improved their performance (see App<strong>en</strong>dix 8). It used statistical <strong>in</strong>formation that the<br />

Commission gathers from rat<strong>in</strong>g homes aga<strong>in</strong>st national standards and <strong>en</strong>hanced this<br />

with qualitative data from <strong>in</strong>spectors to highlight best and poor practice. The report<br />

shows that there has be<strong>en</strong> some slight improvem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> performance overall (s<strong>in</strong>ce<br />

March 2004), with the exception of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes for ol<strong>de</strong>r people. But the rate of<br />

improvem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> such a crucial area of care has be<strong>en</strong> disappo<strong>in</strong>t<strong>in</strong>gly slow, with nearly<br />

half the care homes for ol<strong>de</strong>r people still not meet<strong>in</strong>g the m<strong>in</strong>imum standard relat<strong>in</strong>g to<br />

medication. Of particular concern is the very high perc<strong>en</strong>tage of homes, which hav<strong>in</strong>g<br />

achieved the m<strong>in</strong>imum standard, th<strong>en</strong> slip back and fail. The broad range of evi<strong>de</strong>nce<br />

used for this report has str<strong>en</strong>gth<strong>en</strong>ed the f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g that homes need to address core<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t issues such as tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g of staff and the <strong>de</strong>velopm<strong>en</strong>t and monitor<strong>in</strong>g of<br />

practices and procedures to safeguard resi<strong>de</strong>nts from abuse through medication<br />

mismanagem<strong>en</strong>t and to maximize their wellbe<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

2.4 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION OF THE LITERATURE<br />

REVIEW<br />

The major conclusion of this literature overview is that differ<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion strategies<br />

<strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes have the pot<strong>en</strong>tial to <strong>in</strong>crease the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g. Some<br />

evi<strong>de</strong>nce of effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess is available for pharmaceutical care and multidiscipl<strong>in</strong>ary<br />

<strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tions, <strong>in</strong>volv<strong>in</strong>g the whole team of caregivers. The size, expertise and culture of<br />

the nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff are important for the quality of medication distribution and monitor<strong>in</strong>g<br />

processes. Medication errors occurr<strong>in</strong>g dur<strong>in</strong>g the medication distribution process may<br />

have important cl<strong>in</strong>ical consequ<strong>en</strong>ces. Prev<strong>en</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g medication errors may have a great<br />

pot<strong>en</strong>tial for improvem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> outcomes. However, <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tions to prev<strong>en</strong>t medication<br />

errors differ from <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tions to improve the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g. More research is<br />

nee<strong>de</strong>d on the implem<strong>en</strong>tation of drug formularies <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and on how to use<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation technologies <strong>in</strong> or<strong>de</strong>r to <strong>en</strong>hance medication managem<strong>en</strong>t.<br />

Exist<strong>in</strong>g research focuses on structural <strong>in</strong>dicators (g<strong>en</strong>eral characteristics of <strong>in</strong>stitutions<br />

and the characteristics of their medication managem<strong>en</strong>t systems). The impact of these<br />

structural <strong>in</strong>dicators on the process of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g has be<strong>en</strong> studied through rec<strong>en</strong>tly<br />

<strong>de</strong>veloped process <strong>in</strong>dicators of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality. Several sets of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicators have be<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong>veloped for nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, each measur<strong>in</strong>g differ<strong>en</strong>t aspects of<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality and none of them fully validated or universally applicable. Moreover,<br />

evi<strong>de</strong>nce is lack<strong>in</strong>g on the l<strong>in</strong>k betwe<strong>en</strong> structural <strong>in</strong>dicators, process <strong>in</strong>dicators and<br />

direct measurem<strong>en</strong>ts of outcome at resi<strong>de</strong>nt level.


46 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

3 FIELD STUDY: PRESCRIBING IN HOMES FOR<br />

THE ELDERLY IN BELGIUM (PHEBE)<br />

Authors: Robert Van<strong>de</strong>r Stichele, Monique Elseviers, Charlotte Verrue, Kris So<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong>,<br />

Mike Smet, Mirko Petrovic, Pierre Chevalier, Tom De Floor, Els Mehuys,<br />

Annemie Somers, Michel<strong>in</strong>e Gobert, Anne Sp<strong>in</strong>ew<strong>in</strong>e, Stephan Devriese<br />

3.1 SETTING<br />

The study was conducted <strong>in</strong> Belgium, an <strong>in</strong>dustrialized Western-European country with<br />

10.4 million <strong>in</strong>habitants, with 17.2% el<strong>de</strong>rly (65+), of which 8% live <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes <strong>in</strong><br />

the course of one year. Belgium is divi<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> 10 prov<strong>in</strong>ces (5 Dutch-speak<strong>in</strong>g and 5<br />

Fr<strong>en</strong>ch-speak<strong>in</strong>g) and Brussels-Capital Region. Nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes are multifunctional<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutions, where resi<strong>de</strong>nts are oft<strong>en</strong> treated by their former GP, and where one of<br />

the att<strong>en</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g g<strong>en</strong>eral practitioners has a role of coord<strong>in</strong>at<strong>in</strong>g physician jj .<br />

3.2 OBJECTIVES<br />

The aim of this study was to <strong>in</strong>vestigate the relation betwe<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics<br />

(<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g the characteristics of the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t system) and the quality of<br />

medication prescrib<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

The secondary aim of the study was to evaluate exist<strong>in</strong>g sets of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicators with regard to their suitability for application <strong>in</strong> the Belgian context.<br />

3.3 METHODS<br />

3.3.1 Design<br />

This study was a cross-sectional, <strong>de</strong>scriptive study of a repres<strong>en</strong>tative sample of nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes and resi<strong>de</strong>nts with an exploratory analysis of the relation betwe<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

characteristics and prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality.<br />

3.3.2 Sampl<strong>in</strong>g procedure<br />

We selected three prov<strong>in</strong>ces for participation <strong>in</strong> the study: Oost-Vlaan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>,<br />

Antwerp<strong>en</strong> (both Dutch-speak<strong>in</strong>g) and Ha<strong>in</strong>aut (Fr<strong>en</strong>ch-speak<strong>in</strong>g). In each of these<br />

prov<strong>in</strong>ces a two-stage (<strong>in</strong>stitutions and resi<strong>de</strong>nts) sampl<strong>in</strong>g procedure was used, based<br />

on the Rapid Assessm<strong>en</strong>t approach of the World Health Organization.<br />

In the first stage of sampl<strong>in</strong>g the population of <strong>in</strong>stitutions was <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed. Only <strong>in</strong>stitutions<br />

with at least 30 beds and hav<strong>in</strong>g a certification for high <strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong>sity care beds (RVT beds)<br />

were eligible for selection. Nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes were selected <strong>in</strong> 4 strata based on size (up to<br />

90 or more than 90 resi<strong>de</strong>nts) and type of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (public, private), with a<br />

random selection of 5 <strong>in</strong>stitutions per stratum <strong>in</strong> each prov<strong>in</strong>ce. H<strong>en</strong>ce, <strong>in</strong> each of the<br />

3 participat<strong>in</strong>g prov<strong>in</strong>ces, 20 <strong>in</strong>stitutions (and 5 reserves) were selected with this<br />

stratified random selection procedure. In the sample of the prov<strong>in</strong>ce of Ha<strong>in</strong>aut, 4<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutions of Brussels were <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d.<br />

In the second stage of sampl<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>in</strong> each of selected <strong>in</strong>stitutions, first the coord<strong>in</strong>at<strong>in</strong>g<br />

physician of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home (CRA) was contacted to ask for participation. Th<strong>en</strong>,<br />

writt<strong>en</strong> cons<strong>en</strong>t of the managem<strong>en</strong>t of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home was asked. Umbrella<br />

organizations of CRAs and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes were contacted to stimulate participation.<br />

Refusals were replaced by a new random selection with<strong>in</strong> the same stratum. Per<br />

prov<strong>in</strong>ce, refusals ranged from 0 to 3 nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes per stratum.<br />

In the second stage of sampl<strong>in</strong>g, resi<strong>de</strong>nts were selected <strong>in</strong> the selected <strong>in</strong>stitutions. In<br />

each of the participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions, 30 resi<strong>de</strong>nts (and 10 reserves) were randomly<br />

selected. The treat<strong>in</strong>g physician of each selected resi<strong>de</strong>nt was contacted by the CRA to<br />

jj The Dutch acronym CRA for coörd<strong>in</strong>er<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>, raadgev<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> arts will be used hereafter.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 47<br />

ask for participation. In case of refusal, a new resi<strong>de</strong>nt, treated by another GP, was<br />

selected.<br />

Random selection was performed by the research team based on a numbered list of all<br />

eligible resi<strong>de</strong>nts of a nurs<strong>in</strong>g home, with random computer g<strong>en</strong>erated selection of<br />

20+10 resi<strong>de</strong>nts. Researchers were bl<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>d for the responsible GP of selected<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts. All contacts with GPs were handled by the CRA of the participat<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home. All contacts with the CRAs were coord<strong>in</strong>ated by one of their peers, who had a<br />

repres<strong>en</strong>tative function at the prov<strong>in</strong>cial level for nurs<strong>in</strong>g home health care policy.<br />

3.3.3 Data collection at the level of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

Junior researchers of the <strong>de</strong>partm<strong>en</strong>t of Pharmacy of the University of G<strong>en</strong>t and Master<br />

stu<strong>de</strong>nts of the <strong>de</strong>partm<strong>en</strong>t of Pharmacy of the Catholic University of Louva<strong>in</strong> visited all<br />

participat<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. They first <strong>in</strong>terviewed the director or a member of the<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t team us<strong>in</strong>g a structured questionnaire. Data collection focused on g<strong>en</strong>eral<br />

characteristics of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home (number of beds, number and type of wards),<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eral care managem<strong>en</strong>t (pres<strong>en</strong>ce of a quality coord<strong>in</strong>ator and quality managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

handbook), the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t systems (pres<strong>en</strong>ce and use of a drug formulary,<br />

organization of the medication distribution process, handl<strong>in</strong>g of medication errors), and<br />

the pharmaceutical care activities of supply<strong>in</strong>g pharmacists.<br />

Additionally, they <strong>in</strong>terviewed the head nurse of one or two wards. If two wards were<br />

available, prefer<strong>en</strong>tially one ward for resi<strong>de</strong>nts with good cognitive functions and one<br />

for <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>ted resi<strong>de</strong>nts were selected. Data collection conc<strong>en</strong>trated on the differ<strong>en</strong>t<br />

aspects of the medication distribution process (registration, storage, distribution and<br />

<strong>in</strong>take control of medication).<br />

3.3.4 Data collection at the level of resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

Master stu<strong>de</strong>nts of nurs<strong>in</strong>g sci<strong>en</strong>ces of the Universities of G<strong>en</strong>t and Antwerp<strong>en</strong> visited<br />

all Dutch-speak<strong>in</strong>g participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions and master stu<strong>de</strong>nts of the Public Health<br />

Departm<strong>en</strong>t of the University of Louva<strong>in</strong> visited the <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> the Fr<strong>en</strong>ch-speak<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Prov<strong>in</strong>ce of Ha<strong>in</strong>aut, to collect adm<strong>in</strong>istrative data of selected resi<strong>de</strong>nts (age, g<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r,<br />

WIGW/VIPO kk , OCMW/CPAS and Katz scale). They obta<strong>in</strong>ed a copy of the medication<br />

chart of selected resi<strong>de</strong>nts. These copies were put <strong>in</strong>to an electronic format with<br />

automatic assignm<strong>en</strong>t of ATC/DDD ll to estimate the volume of medic<strong>in</strong>e consumed and<br />

the exp<strong>en</strong>ditures at ex-pharmacy retail price (the fixed total price paid by pati<strong>en</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> the<br />

community pharmacy, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g 6% VAT) and the out-of-pocket exp<strong>en</strong>ditures (copaym<strong>en</strong>t<br />

for reimbursed medic<strong>in</strong>es, paym<strong>en</strong>t for non-reimbursed prescription<br />

medication and paym<strong>en</strong>t for over-the-counter (OTC) medication).<br />

Special procedures were used to transfer the data from the collected medication charts<br />

<strong>in</strong>to computerized databases. A data <strong>en</strong>try program was writt<strong>en</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g tra<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

pharmaceutical and medical personnel to recognize brand names on the medication<br />

chart, assure correct data <strong>en</strong>try of brand, str<strong>en</strong>gth and pack size, posology and status of<br />

the medication (chronic use, acute use, use on an as nee<strong>de</strong>d basis). Entry l<strong>in</strong>es on the<br />

medication chart not referr<strong>in</strong>g to officially registered medication were <strong>en</strong>tered <strong>in</strong> free<br />

text (<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g prescriptions for magistral preparations by pharmacists). Posologies of<br />

anticoagulantia, <strong>in</strong>sul<strong>in</strong> therapy and topical treatm<strong>en</strong>t were not recor<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong>tail. Data<br />

<strong>en</strong>try for registered medication was based on recognition of the unique medic<strong>in</strong>al<br />

product package (<strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed uniquely by the active substance, str<strong>en</strong>gth, pack size,<br />

pharmaceutical form and market<strong>in</strong>g authorization hol<strong>de</strong>r). I<strong>de</strong>ntification of the medic<strong>in</strong>al<br />

product package was facilitated by a quick search <strong>en</strong>try facility where each additional<br />

letter limited the choice possibilities down to a small list of possibilities from which the<br />

right package could be easily picked. Positive i<strong>de</strong>ntification was th<strong>en</strong> confirmed, <strong>in</strong>itiat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

a procedure to get from a support<strong>in</strong>g database the unique i<strong>de</strong>ntification co<strong>de</strong> of the<br />

medic<strong>in</strong>al product package, the number of the <strong>in</strong>ternational classification for medic<strong>in</strong>es,<br />

namely the Anatomical Therapeutic and Chemical Classification (ATC). In addition, the<br />

kk WIGW/VIPO pay lower co-paym<strong>en</strong>ts.<br />

ll Anatomical Therapeutic and Chemical Classification/ Def<strong>in</strong>ed Daily Dose


48 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

appropriate refer<strong>en</strong>ce measure for volume, the Def<strong>in</strong>ed Daily Dose (DDD) was ad<strong>de</strong>d,<br />

as well as the prescription status, the ex-pharmacy retail price (<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g VAT), and the<br />

co-paym<strong>en</strong>t price <strong>in</strong> case of reimbursed medication.<br />

Data from the prov<strong>in</strong>ces of Antwerp<strong>en</strong> and G<strong>en</strong>t were <strong>en</strong>tered by a team of highly<br />

specialized data <strong>en</strong>co<strong>de</strong>rs from a bill<strong>in</strong>g service of the association of community<br />

pharmacists. Data from the prov<strong>in</strong>ce of Ha<strong>in</strong>aut were <strong>en</strong>tered by the master stu<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

who were also responsible for data collection. The stu<strong>de</strong>nts received a formal tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

with exercise before <strong>en</strong>ter<strong>in</strong>g the data. The <strong>in</strong>formation on posology (number and<br />

str<strong>en</strong>gth of dose units per day or per week) was comb<strong>in</strong>ed with the standard price for<br />

daily consumption to calculate the exp<strong>en</strong>ditures per month for chronic medication. For<br />

anticoagulantia and <strong>in</strong>sul<strong>in</strong> therapy (for which no <strong>in</strong>dividual posology was recor<strong>de</strong>d) a<br />

standard Def<strong>in</strong>ed Daily Dose of 1 was assumed. Exp<strong>en</strong>ditures per treatm<strong>en</strong>t course for<br />

acute medication were calculated assum<strong>in</strong>g 7 days per treatm<strong>en</strong>t course, with more or<br />

less days for some pre<strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed specific treatm<strong>en</strong>t courses (e.g. one day for one shot<br />

treatm<strong>en</strong>t of ur<strong>in</strong>ary or vag<strong>in</strong>al <strong>in</strong>fection). No attempt was ma<strong>de</strong> to calculate<br />

exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for medication on an as nee<strong>de</strong>d basis.<br />

Once the data were <strong>en</strong>tered, a thorough process of data clean<strong>in</strong>g comm<strong>en</strong>ced with<br />

i<strong>de</strong>ntification of those magistral preparations which mimic exist<strong>in</strong>g, officially registered<br />

medications.<br />

The f<strong>in</strong>alized medication database was th<strong>en</strong> pr<strong>in</strong>ted out aga<strong>in</strong> on preformatted double<br />

pages, mimick<strong>in</strong>g a medication chart. This outpr<strong>in</strong>t was double checked aga<strong>in</strong>st the<br />

orig<strong>in</strong>al medication chart based on anonymized pati<strong>en</strong>t co<strong>de</strong>s. A computer program<br />

g<strong>en</strong>erated preformulated questions ad<strong>de</strong>d to the appropriate medic<strong>in</strong>es, to ask more<br />

<strong>de</strong>tailed <strong>in</strong>formation on <strong>in</strong>dication (only wh<strong>en</strong> the medication had multiple common<br />

<strong>in</strong>dications), to ask for miss<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation on posology or the status of the medic<strong>in</strong>e<br />

(chronic, acute or as nee<strong>de</strong>d ). This double-si<strong>de</strong>d outpr<strong>in</strong>t was put <strong>in</strong> a sealed and<br />

co<strong>de</strong>d <strong>en</strong>velope, together with a one page questionnaire. On this questionnaire, a<br />

number of common diagnoses and care problems were listed to be ticked wh<strong>en</strong><br />

appropriate. The <strong>en</strong>velope was s<strong>en</strong>t to the CRA of each participat<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g home,<br />

with the request to distribute the correct <strong>en</strong>velope to the treat<strong>in</strong>g physician of the<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt. This triage was performed by the CRA based on a list of pati<strong>en</strong>t co<strong>de</strong>s (with<br />

the coord<strong>in</strong>ation physician bl<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>d to the i<strong>de</strong>ntity of the pati<strong>en</strong>t and the cont<strong>en</strong>t of the<br />

<strong>en</strong>velope) match<strong>in</strong>g with the name and address of the treat<strong>in</strong>g physician.<br />

The responsible GP was asked to control the prescribed medication, to confirm the<br />

chronic, acute of as nee<strong>de</strong>d nature of the medication, to specify the <strong>in</strong>dication for<br />

medication with multiple possible <strong>in</strong>dications, and to provi<strong>de</strong> cl<strong>in</strong>ical characteristics by<br />

tick<strong>in</strong>g a checklist of common pathologies and care problems, and to specify whether<br />

the pati<strong>en</strong>t was or was not <strong>in</strong> palliative or term<strong>in</strong>al care.<br />

Completed forms were s<strong>en</strong>t back <strong>in</strong> a prepaid <strong>en</strong>velope directly to the researchers with<br />

no i<strong>de</strong>ntification but the pati<strong>en</strong>t co<strong>de</strong>. The CRAs assured the necessary rem<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>rs by<br />

mail, telephone, and e-mail, if necessary.<br />

On the basis of the returned medication outpr<strong>in</strong>ts, the exist<strong>in</strong>g medication database was<br />

am<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d and augm<strong>en</strong>ted, wh<strong>en</strong> necessary, and the cl<strong>in</strong>ical data were ad<strong>de</strong>d to the<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt database.<br />

3.3.5 Construction of databases<br />

3.3.5.1 Level of the medication chart<br />

The first database was constructed at the level of separate <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es on the medication<br />

chart and conta<strong>in</strong>ed name, dose and frequ<strong>en</strong>cy, type of medication and ATC/DDD<br />

co<strong>de</strong>, as well as the co<strong>de</strong> of the resi<strong>de</strong>nt to whom this medication was prescribed. For<br />

chronic medication, full exp<strong>en</strong>ditures at ex-pharmacy retail prices and out-of-pocket<br />

exp<strong>en</strong>ditures per month per resi<strong>de</strong>nt were calculated. For acute medication, cost was<br />

expressed as the exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for one complete treatm<strong>en</strong>t for the ma<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>dication.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 49<br />

3.3.5.2 Resi<strong>de</strong>nts level<br />

At the level of resi<strong>de</strong>nts, the database consisted of adm<strong>in</strong>istrative data and cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

characteristics of all sampled resi<strong>de</strong>nts, as recor<strong>de</strong>d from the questionnaires to the<br />

direction and the treat<strong>in</strong>g family physicians.<br />

3.3.5.3 Institution level<br />

3.3.5.4 Ward level<br />

A number of data from secondary analyses were ad<strong>de</strong>d:<br />

the scores of each resi<strong>de</strong>nt on the separate prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicators (and several sum-scores for each set of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicators and overall sum-score);<br />

the aggregated medication data from the medication chart database;<br />

the ma<strong>in</strong> characteristics of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home <strong>in</strong> which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>d.<br />

This database conta<strong>in</strong>ed the results of the <strong>in</strong>stitution questionnaire and the calculated<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutional quality scores of medication care. The <strong>in</strong>stitution database was completed<br />

with<br />

This database conta<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

<strong>de</strong>scriptive <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics <strong>de</strong>rived from external<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istrative databases of RIZIV/INAMI (size, case mix, personnel);<br />

aggregated data from the resi<strong>de</strong>nts database <strong>de</strong>scrib<strong>in</strong>g cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

characteristics, medication use and prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality of <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts.<br />

the results of the ward questionnaire;<br />

the results of the <strong>in</strong>stitution questionnaire;<br />

3.3.6 Construction of quality scores<br />

the calculated <strong>in</strong>stitutional quality scores of the medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t systems;<br />

aggregated data from the resi<strong>de</strong>nts database <strong>de</strong>scrib<strong>in</strong>g cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

characteristics, medication use and prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality of <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts.<br />

3.3.6.1 Quality of medication managem<strong>en</strong>t systems<br />

In or<strong>de</strong>r to l<strong>in</strong>k the quality of the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t system with the quality of<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g, the organizational characteristics of the medication process were translated<br />

<strong>in</strong>to a score. The practical organization of the medication process <strong>in</strong> each nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

was assessed via a semi-structured <strong>in</strong>terview with both the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home director (or<br />

another member of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home managem<strong>en</strong>t) and the s<strong>en</strong>ior nurses of the<br />

selected wards. The topics <strong>in</strong>vestigated <strong>in</strong> this <strong>in</strong>terview were categorized <strong>in</strong> differ<strong>en</strong>t<br />

doma<strong>in</strong>s: medication managem<strong>en</strong>t, formulary and pharmacy for the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t; work procedures, communication, medication chart, medication storage,<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts medication autonomy, preparation of medication, adm<strong>in</strong>istration of<br />

medication and <strong>in</strong>formation about medication for the divisional head (see table 3.1 for a<br />

more <strong>de</strong>tailed <strong>de</strong>scription of the doma<strong>in</strong>s). Per <strong>in</strong>vestigated topic, a score was attributed<br />

to the differ<strong>en</strong>t answer<strong>in</strong>g possibilities by a panel consist<strong>in</strong>g of field experts: 1 nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home director, 1 medical coord<strong>in</strong>ator, 3 head nurses, 1 nurs<strong>in</strong>g director, 3 pharmacists,<br />

1 epi<strong>de</strong>miologist and 1 social worker. To each answer<strong>in</strong>g possibility a score rang<strong>in</strong>g<br />

from 3 to + 3 was attributed by the panel. The 0 was chos<strong>en</strong> wh<strong>en</strong>ever the answer<br />

reflected a legal obligation or a situation without impact on the quality of care. The


50 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Institution Level<br />

gradations 1, 2 and 3 (positive or negative) respectively reflected a small, mo<strong>de</strong>rate or<br />

serious impact on the quality of provi<strong>de</strong>d care. The <strong>in</strong>dividual doma<strong>in</strong> scores were<br />

summed to a total score for both the wards and the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home managem<strong>en</strong>t. The<br />

total score, which is a sum-score of all the differ<strong>en</strong>t doma<strong>in</strong> scores, reflects the quality<br />

of the medication process <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home.<br />

Table 3.1: Doma<strong>in</strong>s of medication managem<strong>en</strong>t systems<br />

Pharmacy Aspects of <strong>de</strong>livery of medications from the pharmacy to<br />

the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

Formulary Availability of the formulary <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>stitution<br />

Medication Managem<strong>en</strong>t The procedures perta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g to quality managem<strong>en</strong>t and<br />

evaluation<br />

Ward Level<br />

Information The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which medication related <strong>in</strong>formation is<br />

giv<strong>en</strong> or easily available for resi<strong>de</strong>nts and nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff<br />

Adm<strong>in</strong>istration The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the adm<strong>in</strong>istration of medic<strong>in</strong>es to<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts by nurses is organized and controlled<br />

Preparation The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the preparation of the<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istration of medic<strong>in</strong>es (read<strong>in</strong>g from the<br />

medication chart and fetch<strong>in</strong>g from the drug stock) is<br />

organized and controlled<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nt Autonomy The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is allowed autonomy <strong>in</strong><br />

the managem<strong>en</strong>t of his/her medication<br />

Storage The precautions tak<strong>en</strong> for keep<strong>in</strong>g medic<strong>in</strong>es<br />

Medication Records The amount of and the ma<strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong>ance of <strong>in</strong>formation on<br />

medic<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g record.<br />

Communication The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which communication about medic<strong>in</strong>es<br />

and resi<strong>de</strong>nts health is go<strong>in</strong>g on betwe<strong>en</strong> nurses and<br />

physicians.<br />

Formulary The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which a drug formulary is available and<br />

promoted<br />

Work Procedures The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the process of the medication<br />

distribution is explicitly <strong>de</strong>scribed <strong>in</strong> writt<strong>en</strong> procedures<br />

One week before the cons<strong>en</strong>sus meet<strong>in</strong>g, all experts received an electronic copy of the<br />

PowerPo<strong>in</strong>t pres<strong>en</strong>tation support<strong>in</strong>g the discussion as well as the questionnaire used<br />

dur<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>terviews. In preparation of the meet<strong>in</strong>g, a prelim<strong>in</strong>ary score was attributed<br />

by 2 members of the PHEBE team (2 pharmacists who had also assisted with the<br />

literature search, the elaboration of the questionnaire and with the <strong>in</strong>terviews <strong>in</strong> the<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes). Their reason<strong>in</strong>g beh<strong>in</strong>d this score was also provi<strong>de</strong>d to the panel <strong>in</strong> the<br />

pres<strong>en</strong>tation. This method was used <strong>in</strong> or<strong>de</strong>r to <strong>in</strong>itiate and facilitate possible<br />

discussions. On each topic, the panel discussed the giv<strong>en</strong> scores and reasoned until a<br />

cons<strong>en</strong>sus was reached. The whole scor<strong>in</strong>g procedure took about 3 hours. The <strong>de</strong>tails<br />

are shown <strong>in</strong> App<strong>en</strong>dix 9.<br />

3.3.6.2 Prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality scores<br />

The procedure <strong>de</strong>scribed above provi<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong>formation on the medications used by each<br />

<strong>in</strong>dividual resi<strong>de</strong>nt and his or her relevant cl<strong>in</strong>ical diagnoses and care problems. With<br />

this limited amount of <strong>in</strong>formation it is possible to assess to a certa<strong>in</strong> ext<strong>en</strong>t the quality<br />

of the process of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g medic<strong>in</strong>es, focus<strong>in</strong>g on the drug choice process of the<br />

physicians.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 51<br />

We used three exist<strong>in</strong>g sets of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>in</strong>dicators, specially adapted to the<br />

sett<strong>in</strong>g of the el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eral and the resi<strong>de</strong>nts of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes <strong>in</strong> particular:<br />

The BEERS criteria of pot<strong>en</strong>tially <strong>in</strong>appropriate prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

The ACOVE Criteria of un<strong>de</strong>rprescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

The BEDNURS (Berg<strong>en</strong> District Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Home Study)<br />

In addition, we ad<strong>de</strong>d 2 other approaches to quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

Chronic use of b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es<br />

Belgian medication with low b<strong>en</strong>efit/risk ratio<br />

We will <strong>de</strong>scribe <strong>in</strong> more <strong>de</strong>tail the three <strong>in</strong>ternational sets of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicators and how these were adapted for this project <strong>in</strong> Belgium, as well as the two<br />

other approaches.<br />

The BEERS Criteria<br />

Beers and colleagues <strong>de</strong>veloped <strong>in</strong> 1997 explicit criteria for pot<strong>en</strong>tially <strong>in</strong>appropriate<br />

drug prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> ambulatory ol<strong>de</strong>r adults aged 65 and over. These criteria were<br />

wi<strong>de</strong>ly used to estimate the preval<strong>en</strong>ce of <strong>in</strong>appropriate drugs. At first, the Beers list of<br />

<strong>in</strong>appropriate medic<strong>in</strong>es was a list of medic<strong>in</strong>es which use should be avoi<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly,<br />

whatever their <strong>in</strong>dication. The Beers List was updated <strong>in</strong> 2002. Some medic<strong>in</strong>es were<br />

<strong>de</strong>leted and other ad<strong>de</strong>d to this list <strong>in</strong> the 2002 update with 48 <strong>in</strong>dividual medications or<br />

classes of medication that should g<strong>en</strong>erally be avoi<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> persons 65 years or ol<strong>de</strong>r<br />

because they are either <strong>in</strong>effective or they pose unnecessarily high risk for ol<strong>de</strong>r<br />

persons and a safer alternative is available. In addition, for some medic<strong>in</strong>es dose and comorbidity<br />

were consi<strong>de</strong>red. For 8 medic<strong>in</strong>es the <strong>in</strong>appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess of the medic<strong>in</strong>e was<br />

conditioned by exceed<strong>in</strong>g a maximal appropriate dose. The most important change was<br />

the production of a list of 20 medical conditions with a formal list of drugs that should<br />

not be used <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts hav<strong>in</strong>g these conditions.<br />

We experi<strong>en</strong>ce a number of problems wh<strong>en</strong> adopt<strong>in</strong>g this list to the Belgian situation.<br />

First, 10 of the 48 pot<strong>en</strong>tially <strong>in</strong>appropriate medications were not registered on the<br />

Belgian market, and another 25 have a very limited consumption. Second, programm<strong>in</strong>g<br />

the list of contra-<strong>in</strong>dicated medic<strong>in</strong>es for some medical conditions proved to be<br />

cumbersome as some very broad or ill-<strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed classes of drugs were used. Examples of<br />

broad classes are drugs with high salt cont<strong>en</strong>t or antichol<strong>in</strong>ergic drugs. This is difficult<br />

to program for i<strong>de</strong>ntification based on <strong>in</strong>dividual medic<strong>in</strong>al product packages. Examples<br />

of ill-<strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ed classes are antichol<strong>in</strong>ergic anti<strong>de</strong>pressants . Some of the medical<br />

conditions <strong>in</strong> the updated list were not on our questionnaire of cl<strong>in</strong>ical data (e.g. atrial<br />

arrhythmia, blad<strong>de</strong>r obstruction). Third, some of <strong>in</strong>appropriate medications registered<br />

<strong>in</strong> Belgium, are not registered <strong>in</strong> the US, and h<strong>en</strong>ce, not consi<strong>de</strong>red <strong>in</strong> the BEERS list<br />

(e.g. a number of long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es, such as flunitrazepam).<br />

H<strong>en</strong>ce, we limited the use of the BEERS criteria to the pot<strong>en</strong>tially <strong>in</strong>appropriate<br />

medication with a substantial usage <strong>in</strong> Belgium. This approach makes our data on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality not suitable for <strong>in</strong>ternational comparisons. However, the items we<br />

reta<strong>in</strong>ed provi<strong>de</strong> a partial but valid contribution to our attempt to quantify prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

quality problems.<br />

The ACOVE criteria of un<strong>de</strong>rprescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

We wanted to <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong> our analysis of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality the dim<strong>en</strong>sion of<br />

un<strong>de</strong>rprescrib<strong>in</strong>g. For this purpose, we turned to the Assess<strong>in</strong>g Care of Vulnerable<br />

El<strong>de</strong>rs (ACOVE) project. This is a set of 203 quality <strong>in</strong>dicators for care of 22 conditions<br />

(<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g geriatric syndromes and 11 associated diseases) and 6 doma<strong>in</strong>s of care<br />

(scre<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g, prev<strong>en</strong>tion, diagnosis, treatm<strong>en</strong>t, follow-up, and cont<strong>in</strong>uity). Fourte<strong>en</strong> types<br />

of medical <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion were consi<strong>de</strong>red, one of which was medication (with 68<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicators perta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g to pharmaceutical <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion). N<strong>in</strong>e of these <strong>in</strong>dicators were


52 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

related to un<strong>de</strong>rprescrib<strong>in</strong>g of medic<strong>in</strong>es. All these <strong>in</strong>dicators have the form of<br />

IF/THEN/UNLESS. IF specifies the cl<strong>in</strong>ical condition to which the quality <strong>in</strong>dicator<br />

perta<strong>in</strong>s. THEN specifies the medical act that should be performed. UNLESS lists the<br />

exceptions to the rule. An example of an un<strong>de</strong>rprescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>in</strong>dicator is: if the<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>t has diabetes, th<strong>en</strong> low dose aspir<strong>in</strong> should be prescribed, unless there is a<br />

contra-<strong>in</strong>dication for aspir<strong>in</strong>. These criteria were <strong>de</strong>signed to be assessed by<br />

pharmacists, perform<strong>in</strong>g a cl<strong>in</strong>ical review of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts and their medication, with full<br />

access to the medical record of the pati<strong>en</strong>ts.<br />

We were able to program sev<strong>en</strong> of the n<strong>in</strong>e ACOVE un<strong>de</strong>rprescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicators. Two criteria could not be assessed because they perta<strong>in</strong>ed to pati<strong>en</strong>ts with<br />

atrial fibrillation, a condition which was not on our checklist <strong>in</strong> the cl<strong>in</strong>ical questionnaire.<br />

The rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g 7 quality criteria were programmed for the IF/THEN conditions. The<br />

UNLESS statem<strong>en</strong>ts (with the list of exceptions) were too complex to program and<br />

could not be assessed <strong>in</strong> a valid way, giv<strong>en</strong> the limited nature of the data we collected.<br />

Aga<strong>in</strong>, this limits the validity of our data for <strong>in</strong>ternational comparison.<br />

The criteria from the BEDNURS study<br />

In this approach, the occurr<strong>en</strong>ce of pot<strong>en</strong>tial medical problems is <strong>in</strong>vestigated us<strong>in</strong>g an<br />

ext<strong>en</strong>sive physician/pharmacist medication review. The study focused on cardiovascular<br />

and c<strong>en</strong>tral nervous problems. It addresses <strong>in</strong>dication, dosage and duration of<br />

treatm<strong>en</strong>t, as well as safety, drug-drug and drug-disease <strong>in</strong>teractions, duplication and<br />

un<strong>de</strong>rprescrib<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

We were able to program most (31) of the pot<strong>en</strong>tial medication problems of the<br />

BEDNURSE approach <strong>in</strong>to criteria, which could be g<strong>en</strong>erated by a computer analysis<br />

(see full list <strong>in</strong> results section). Dropped items were: Vitam<strong>in</strong> C for cystitis prophylaxis,<br />

nutritional supplem<strong>en</strong>ts for iron <strong>de</strong>fici<strong>en</strong>cy anaemia. Some items were slightly simplified:<br />

use of antipsychotics <strong>in</strong> non-psychotic pati<strong>en</strong>ts was simplified to use of antipsychotics,<br />

because we did not know whether our pati<strong>en</strong>ts were psychotic or not. Concomitant<br />

use of c<strong>en</strong>tral nervous system drugs was simplified to concomitant use of ATC class<br />

N05 (psycholeptics) and N06 (psychoanaleptics) <strong>in</strong> three differ<strong>en</strong>t comb<strong>in</strong>ations.<br />

Chronic use of b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es<br />

All pati<strong>en</strong>ts with chronic use of b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es (and related substances), whether used<br />

as sedative or hypnotic, were recor<strong>de</strong>d. We <strong>de</strong>ci<strong>de</strong>d to <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> a flag for usage of any<br />

b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>e or <strong>de</strong>rivative, as studies have shown <strong>in</strong>creased risk for falls and/or hip<br />

fracture for b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es with very short, short half-lives as well as long-act<strong>in</strong>g<br />

b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es, regardless whether these products were used as hypnotics or<br />

sedatives.<br />

Belgian medications with low b<strong>en</strong>efit/risk ratio<br />

A list of medication with low b<strong>en</strong>efit/risk ratio of the Belgian Drug Information C<strong>en</strong>ter<br />

was used. These are officially registered medic<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong> Belgium with poor evi<strong>de</strong>nce of<br />

efficacy, or with too many active substances comb<strong>in</strong>ed. These medications can be<br />

recognized on the web site of the c<strong>en</strong>tre (www.bcfi.be), because no recomm<strong>en</strong>dations<br />

for posology are ma<strong>de</strong> for these medic<strong>in</strong>es.<br />

3.3.7 Statistical analysis<br />

Data analysis was performed with the statistical package SPSS version 12.0. A p-value of<br />

p


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 53<br />

and a medication chart available. For <strong>de</strong>scription of quality prescrib<strong>in</strong>g parameters, only<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts with cl<strong>in</strong>ical parameters available (i.e. medication form returned by responsible<br />

GP) and not <strong>in</strong> need for palliative care were <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d.<br />

Before us<strong>in</strong>g analytic statistical methods, parameters of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality were<br />

carefully tested, <strong>in</strong>vestigat<strong>in</strong>g their <strong>in</strong>ternal relationship, their predictive value and their<br />

coverage of differ<strong>en</strong>t aspects of quality (see table 3.2).<br />

Table 3.2 : Operationalization of quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> this research<br />

VOLUME Number of medications on the medication chart<br />

Number of systemic chronic medications<br />

EXPENDITURES Public exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for reimbursed chronic medication (RIZIV/INAMI)<br />

Co-paym<strong>en</strong>t for reimbursed chronic medication<br />

Paym<strong>en</strong>ts for non-reimbursed medication (at ex-pharmacy retail price, VAT<br />

6% <strong>in</strong>cl.)<br />

APPROPRIATENESS SUMSCORE of Pot<strong>en</strong>tial Prescrib<strong>in</strong>g Quality Problems<br />

3.3.7.2 Univariate analysis<br />

Univariate analysis was performed at the level of resi<strong>de</strong>nts explor<strong>in</strong>g the relationship<br />

betwe<strong>en</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>t and <strong>in</strong>stitution characteristics and the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g. Univariate<br />

analyses were also performed at the level of the <strong>in</strong>stitution and the level of the ward to<br />

<strong>in</strong>vestigate the <strong>in</strong>ternal <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy betwe<strong>en</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>t and <strong>in</strong>stitution characteristics and<br />

their relationship with the parameters of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality. Also the relationship<br />

betwe<strong>en</strong> characteristics of medication managem<strong>en</strong>t and quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g was first<br />

explored us<strong>in</strong>g univariate statistical techniques (bivariate regression analysis, one-way<br />

ANOVA). We preferred to use the non-parametric Spearman Rank Correlation Test<br />

(<strong>in</strong>dicated by rs) because of the semi-quantitative nature of the data (quality scores) or<br />

the skewness of their distribution (exp<strong>en</strong>ditures).<br />

To answer the specific research question on the relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

medication managem<strong>en</strong>t and the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g, multivariate analysis at the<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitution level was performed us<strong>in</strong>g multiple regressions. In table 3.3 an overview is<br />

giv<strong>en</strong> of the regression analyses performed at the differ<strong>en</strong>t levels of analysis <strong>in</strong> univariate<br />

and <strong>in</strong> multivariate approach.


54 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Table 3.3 : Conceptual framework of the analysis<br />

G<strong>en</strong>eral Institutional Characteristics<br />

Size <strong>in</strong> Beds<br />

Size <strong>in</strong> Wards<br />

Type<br />

Stratum<br />

Prov<strong>in</strong>ce<br />

Price Competition<br />

Deliver<strong>in</strong>g Pharmacists<br />

Price Competition<br />

Monopoloy <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong>livery<br />

perc<strong>en</strong>t RVT beds<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>t bill<strong>in</strong>g private exp.<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>t OCMW-pati<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

Staff<strong>in</strong>g characteristics<br />

CRA-activity<br />

Number of GPs visit<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nts per nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nts per A1+A2<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>t A1<br />

Medication managem<strong>en</strong>t systems at<br />

the <strong>in</strong>stitution level<br />

Manag<br />

Form<br />

Pharm<br />

Medication managem<strong>en</strong>t systemts at<br />

the ward level<br />

Procedures<br />

Pharmacist<br />

Communication<br />

Medical record<br />

Storage<br />

Self Medication<br />

Preparation medication<br />

Adm<strong>in</strong>istration<br />

Information<br />

SUMSCORE MMS<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nts characteristics<br />

(Demographics and case mix)<br />

Age<br />

Sex<br />

Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy score (Katz)<br />

Dem<strong>en</strong>tia<br />

Number of diagnoses<br />

Number of care problems<br />

3.3.7.3 Multivariate analysis<br />

RESIDENT<br />

LEVEL<br />

(N=2510 OR<br />

N=1730)<br />

WARD LEVEL<br />

(N=112)<br />

UNIVARIATE UNIVARIATE UNIVARIATE MULTIVARIATE<br />

Impact on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

Impact on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

quality and<br />

medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

systems<br />

Impact on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

quality and<br />

medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

Impact on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

quality<br />

Impact on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

quality<br />

Impact on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

quality<br />

INSTITUTION LEVEL<br />

(N=76, 74 OR 72)<br />

Impact on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

Impact on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

Impact on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

Impact on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

Impact on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

S<strong>in</strong>ce differ<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual consumption and prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality could be expla<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

both by resi<strong>de</strong>nt and/or nurs<strong>in</strong>g home characteristics, it is important to <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> both<br />

<strong>in</strong>dividual as well as organizational characteristics simultaneously <strong>in</strong> the analyses <strong>in</strong> or<strong>de</strong>r<br />

to dis<strong>en</strong>tangle both sets of variables on prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality.<br />

Multivariate data analysis techniques such as regression analysis allow to separate these<br />

effects and to i<strong>de</strong>ntify their dist<strong>in</strong>ct impact on drug consumption. A number of


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 55<br />

dim<strong>en</strong>sions of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality (averages at nurs<strong>in</strong>g home level) will be used as<br />

<strong>en</strong>dog<strong>en</strong>ous variable <strong>in</strong> the regressions. The aim is to i<strong>de</strong>ntity the impact of resi<strong>de</strong>nt and<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home characteristics on three dim<strong>en</strong>sions of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality: volume of<br />

usage (average number of medications per resi<strong>de</strong>nt, average number of chronic systemic<br />

drugs per resi<strong>de</strong>nt); exp<strong>en</strong>ditures (average ex-pharmacy exp<strong>en</strong>ditures of reimbursed<br />

chronic drugs per month per resi<strong>de</strong>nt, average co-paym<strong>en</strong>t for chronic reimbursed<br />

drugs per month per resi<strong>de</strong>nt, average out-of-pocket paym<strong>en</strong>t of non-reimbursed drugs<br />

per month per resi<strong>de</strong>nt, perc<strong>en</strong>tage of cheap drugs), and appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

(average sum-score of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality problems).<br />

Descriptive statistics of these <strong>en</strong>dog<strong>en</strong>ous (or <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt) variables (<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g Box plots<br />

and histograms and Box plots) and <strong>de</strong>scriptives per stratum and prov<strong>in</strong>ce of these<br />

variables are reported <strong>in</strong> App<strong>en</strong>dices 11 and 12.<br />

These variables are the result of an aggregation process of resi<strong>de</strong>nt variables (express<strong>in</strong>g<br />

quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g) to the level of the <strong>in</strong>stitution. Per <strong>in</strong>stitution the mean of all<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts per <strong>in</strong>stitution is giv<strong>en</strong>. Consequ<strong>en</strong>tly these data cannot be consi<strong>de</strong>red as ratio<br />

variables (or <strong>in</strong>teger or count variables). H<strong>en</strong>ce, we opted for regression techniques<br />

based on Ord<strong>in</strong>ary Least Square methods, and not on b<strong>in</strong>omial or Poisson approaches.<br />

We refra<strong>in</strong>ed from perform<strong>in</strong>g multivariate, multilevel regression techniques at the level<br />

of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts, because most data on medication managem<strong>en</strong>t systems were recor<strong>de</strong>d<br />

at ward level and not at <strong>in</strong>stitutional level. Ward data could not be reliably attributed to<br />

the resi<strong>de</strong>nt level, as there was no certa<strong>in</strong>ty that the resi<strong>de</strong>nt belonged to either one of<br />

the surveyed wards.<br />

In the follow<strong>in</strong>g sections, the 7 outcome variables pres<strong>en</strong>ted on the previous pages will<br />

be used as <strong>en</strong>dog<strong>en</strong>ous variables <strong>in</strong> regressions. Possible explanatory variables are<br />

listed <strong>in</strong> table 3.4. All regression mo<strong>de</strong>ls start with a full mo<strong>de</strong>l <strong>in</strong> which all variables<br />

listed <strong>in</strong> the table are used as exog<strong>en</strong>ous variables.<br />

Table 3.4 Variables <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> the full mo<strong>de</strong>l<br />

GENERAL INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS<br />

LOCATION Prov<strong>in</strong>ce<br />

TYPE Public / Private not-for-profit / private for profit<br />

SIZE Number of beds, number of wards<br />

MEDICAL STAFF Number of resi<strong>de</strong>nts per visit<strong>in</strong>g g<strong>en</strong>eral practitioner, Perc<strong>en</strong>tage<br />

of resi<strong>de</strong>nts treated by the coord<strong>in</strong>ation physician<br />

DELIVERING PHARMACIST Type of pharmacy, S<strong>in</strong>gle or multiple <strong>de</strong>liver<strong>in</strong>g pharmacies<br />

NURSING STAFF Number of resi<strong>de</strong>nts per nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff, per nurse, per nurse<br />

bachelor level<br />

BILLING TO RESIDENTS Perc<strong>en</strong>tage of resi<strong>de</strong>nts with separate bill for private exp<strong>en</strong>ditures<br />

MEDICATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS<br />

At managem<strong>en</strong>t level (3 items), At ward level (8 items)<br />

CASE-MIX<br />

Age<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage of female resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage of beds certified as highly <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt (RVT)<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage of resi<strong>de</strong>nts with <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy score C<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage of resi<strong>de</strong>nts with <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia<br />

Number of cl<strong>in</strong>ical problems, number of care problems<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage of resi<strong>de</strong>nts liv<strong>in</strong>g on local social welfare<br />

The follow<strong>in</strong>g procedure was used for all 7 outcome variables. First, a Full mo<strong>de</strong>l was<br />

estimated (us<strong>in</strong>g Ord<strong>in</strong>ary Least Squares (OLS)) <strong>in</strong> which all exog<strong>en</strong>ous variables from


56 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

table 3.4 were <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d. Residuals were exam<strong>in</strong>ed to <strong>de</strong>tect possible bias due to<br />

misspecification of the mo<strong>de</strong>l.<br />

Exam<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>dividual significance of the variables <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> these full mo<strong>de</strong>l regressions<br />

revealed that a number of them were not estimated significantly differ<strong>en</strong>t from zero and<br />

did therefore not contribute to expla<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g differ<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> the <strong>en</strong>dog<strong>en</strong>ous variable.<br />

These variables were iteratively omitted from the regression, start<strong>in</strong>g with the least<br />

significant one (i.e. the variable with the smallest partial correlation with the <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt<br />

variable). After the removal of the least significant variable, the equation was reestimated<br />

and the variable with the smallest partial correlation was consi<strong>de</strong>red next.<br />

The procedure stopped wh<strong>en</strong> there were no variables <strong>in</strong> the equation that satisfied the<br />

removal criterion (t-statistic smaller than 0.75 (<strong>in</strong> absolute value)). Thus the rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

variables <strong>in</strong> the equation all have t-statistics larger than 0.75 (<strong>in</strong> absolute values).<br />

3.3.8 Ethical consi<strong>de</strong>rations<br />

Before the start of the study, the project proposal was pres<strong>en</strong>ted at the Regional<br />

Organizations of Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes and the prov<strong>in</strong>cial CRAs. The protocol of this study<br />

was submitted to and approved by the ethical commission of the sci<strong>en</strong>tific organization<br />

of g<strong>en</strong>eral practitioners of Flan<strong>de</strong>rs (WVVH). Informed cons<strong>en</strong>t was asked to the<br />

directors of selected nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and of treat<strong>in</strong>g physicians. All data were collected<br />

anonymously. It was the exclusive task of the CRA of the participat<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes to<br />

anonymize the data for the researchers and to unlock the i<strong>de</strong>ntity of the GPs to s<strong>en</strong>d<br />

them the pr<strong>in</strong>t out of the medication charts.<br />

3.4 RESULTS<br />

This study was performed <strong>in</strong> 76 randomly selected nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes located <strong>in</strong> the<br />

prov<strong>in</strong>ces of Antwerp<strong>en</strong>, Oost-Vlaan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> and Ha<strong>in</strong>aut, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g 2,510 resi<strong>de</strong>nts with<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istrative data and a medication chart available.<br />

3.4.1 Repres<strong>en</strong>tativity of the sample<br />

In Belgium, 1,722 nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes with 126,346 beds were registered <strong>in</strong> 2004. Among<br />

them 970 were nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes with at least 30 beds and with a mixed character hav<strong>in</strong>g<br />

available both ROB beds (beds for healthy el<strong>de</strong>rly) as well as RVT beds (beds for el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

<strong>in</strong> need for nurs<strong>in</strong>g care). Out of the latter group, <strong>in</strong>stitutions were randomly selected<br />

<strong>in</strong> 3 prov<strong>in</strong>ces us<strong>in</strong>g a stratification system based on size (less or more than 90 beds)<br />

and type (OCMW/CPAS or private).<br />

In table 3.5, basic characteristics of the eligible Belgian <strong>in</strong>stitutions and the PHEBE<br />

participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions are compared, show<strong>in</strong>g an acceptable fit betwe<strong>en</strong> both.<br />

Table 3.5: Comparison of basic characteristics of the sampled nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

with the population of Belgian nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

Number Mean size (<strong>in</strong> beds) % RVT beds Type (OCMW-privé)<br />

Prov<strong>in</strong>ce Total In study Total In study Total In study Total % private In study % private<br />

Antw 159 27 (17%) 104 108 49 48 65 52<br />

OostVl 152 25 (16%) 100 105 45 46 57 56<br />

H<strong>en</strong>eg 115 24 (21%) 102 115 50 51 61 70<br />

Belgium 987 76 (8%) 97 108 48 48 61 58<br />

*<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g only mixed ROB/RVT nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes with at least 30 beds<br />

Approximately 8% of the Belgian population over 65 is liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a nurs<strong>in</strong>g home. In 2004,<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutionalized el<strong>de</strong>rly had a mean age of 84.9 and 76.9% of them were female.<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> our sample had a mean age of 84.8 and 77.4% were female.<br />

H<strong>en</strong>ce, we conclu<strong>de</strong>d that our sample of resi<strong>de</strong>nts was repres<strong>en</strong>tative for the<br />

population of resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> Belgian nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. The size of our sampled <strong>in</strong>stitutions<br />

was slightly larger, private <strong>in</strong>stitutions were somewhat un<strong>de</strong>rrepres<strong>en</strong>ted <strong>in</strong> the<br />

prov<strong>in</strong>ce of Antwerp<strong>en</strong> and somewhat overrepres<strong>en</strong>ted <strong>in</strong> the prov<strong>in</strong>ce of Ha<strong>in</strong>aut.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 57<br />

3.4.2 Description of participat<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

The selected nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes had a mean capacity of 106 beds (range: 35 - 306) and a<br />

mean number of wards of 2.6 (range: 1 - 7). The distribution of the type of wards is<br />

shown <strong>in</strong> figure 3.1. The wards were ma<strong>in</strong>ly (68.0%) op<strong>en</strong> mixed , mean<strong>in</strong>g that they are<br />

op<strong>en</strong> for all k<strong>in</strong>ds of resi<strong>de</strong>nts, ev<strong>en</strong> those with beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia. The rest of the<br />

wards were closed (=closed ward only for <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>ted resi<strong>de</strong>nts; 17.2%), closed-mixed<br />

(=closed ward for <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>ted as well as non-<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>ted resi<strong>de</strong>nts; 9.9%) or op<strong>en</strong> (=op<strong>en</strong><br />

ward only for non-<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>ted el<strong>de</strong>rly; 4.9%).<br />

Figure 3.1: Distribution of type of wards <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes <strong>in</strong><br />

Belgium (N=112)<br />

op<strong>en</strong><br />

closed mixed<br />

closed<br />

op<strong>en</strong> mixed<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80<br />

% of total number of wards<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes had 20 to 153 RVT beds (mean perc<strong>en</strong>tage of RVT beds 48%).<br />

Mean age of their resi<strong>de</strong>nts was 85 (range 79-89) with 77% of females (range 59-86%).<br />

Case-mix accord<strong>in</strong>g to the Katz score revealed that 20% of their resi<strong>de</strong>nts had Katz 0,<br />

15% Katz A, 20% Katz B and 45% Katz C.<br />

Participat<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes had betwe<strong>en</strong> 35 and 249 staff members <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g<br />

approximately 65% of nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff. Resi<strong>de</strong>nt/nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff ratio ranged from 2.0 to 6.2<br />

(mean 3.2 resi<strong>de</strong>nts per nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff member). Only 37% of nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff was qualified as<br />

a nurse (13% bachelors and 24% qualified nurses). Distribution of nurs<strong>in</strong>g personnel<br />

accord<strong>in</strong>g to qualification is shown <strong>in</strong> figure 3.2. Per nurs<strong>in</strong>g home, a mean of<br />

31.8 visit<strong>in</strong>g GPs was i<strong>de</strong>ntified (range: 7 - 115). On average, the CRA was the treat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

doctor for 23.9% of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts (range: 0 86.0%).


58 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Figure 3.2: Mean proportional distribution of bachelors, qualified nurses and<br />

nurse assistants <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (n=76)<br />

% % of of total total nurs<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff staff<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

3.4.3 Description of the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t system at the level of the<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitution<br />

3.4.3.1 Medication managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

% Bachelor % Qualified % Nurse assistants<br />

The vast majority of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes had a quality coord<strong>in</strong>ator (88.2%) and a quality<br />

handbook (84.2%). A quality coord<strong>in</strong>ator is responsible for good quality of services<br />

provi<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home, by coord<strong>in</strong>at<strong>in</strong>g all quality related activities (care,<br />

medication, food and hotel services) and contribut<strong>in</strong>g to the <strong>de</strong>velopm<strong>en</strong>t of a g<strong>en</strong>eral<br />

quality handbook and work procedures. 81.6% (62/76) of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home directors<br />

had ma<strong>de</strong> writt<strong>en</strong> agreem<strong>en</strong>ts with their staff on the practical organization of the<br />

medication process. These agreem<strong>en</strong>ts were writt<strong>en</strong> down (not necessarily signed) <strong>in</strong><br />

the g<strong>en</strong>eral quality handbook (64.5%) and/or <strong>in</strong> separate work procedures (53.2%).<br />

Table 3.6 gives an overview of the differ<strong>en</strong>t aspects of the medication process whereof<br />

writt<strong>en</strong> agreem<strong>en</strong>ts were ma<strong>de</strong>. The number of writt<strong>en</strong> agreem<strong>en</strong>ts per nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

was distributed as follows: 16.1% ma<strong>de</strong> 1 to 4 writt<strong>en</strong> agreem<strong>en</strong>ts, 41.9% ma<strong>de</strong> 5 to 9<br />

and 41.9% ma<strong>de</strong> 10 or more.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 59<br />

Table 3.6: Writt<strong>en</strong> agreem<strong>en</strong>ts regard<strong>in</strong>g the medication process<br />

Topic % of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes that<br />

ma<strong>de</strong> writt<strong>en</strong> agreem<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

on this topic<br />

<strong>en</strong>gagem<strong>en</strong>ts with the <strong>de</strong>liver<strong>in</strong>g pharmacy 64.5%<br />

<strong>en</strong>gagem<strong>en</strong>ts with the GPs concern<strong>in</strong>g the prescription of<br />

medication or the modification of therapy<br />

61.3%<br />

the draw<strong>in</strong>g up of medication charts 74.2%<br />

the correct way to or<strong>de</strong>r medication 74.2%<br />

the managem<strong>en</strong>t and storage of medication 66.1%<br />

the disposal of excess or expired medication 53.2%<br />

the managem<strong>en</strong>t of narcotics 67.7%<br />

the disp<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>g of medication 80.6%<br />

the adm<strong>in</strong>istration of medication 79.0%<br />

the adm<strong>in</strong>istration of <strong>in</strong>jections 54.8%<br />

the adm<strong>in</strong>istration of over-the-counter medication 66.1%<br />

the adm<strong>in</strong>istration of prescription medication <strong>in</strong> acute situations<br />

without consult<strong>in</strong>g the GP<br />

3.4.3.2 Formulary<br />

3.4.3.3 Pharmacy<br />

67.7%<br />

To m<strong>in</strong>imize the risk of medication related errors <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, a proactive<br />

evaluation of the medication process is advisable. However, only one <strong>in</strong> five (21.1%) of<br />

the <strong>in</strong>vestigated nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes evaluated the medication process on a regular basis (at<br />

least every 6 months). 39.5% of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes performed such evaluation annually,<br />

while 39.5% never (or less than once a year) evaluated the medication process. A selfreport<strong>in</strong>g<br />

medication error system, whereby the staff records all medication errors<br />

throughout the <strong>en</strong>tire nurs<strong>in</strong>g home, can be very useful to i<strong>de</strong>ntify errors and unsafe<br />

conditions. Such self-report<strong>in</strong>g medication error system had be<strong>en</strong> set up <strong>in</strong> 69.7%<br />

(53/76) of the <strong>in</strong>vestigated nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and <strong>in</strong> most of these nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (48/53)<br />

this resulted <strong>in</strong> actions tak<strong>en</strong> to prev<strong>en</strong>t these errors <strong>in</strong> future. Also about half (13/23)<br />

of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes not hav<strong>in</strong>g a self-report<strong>in</strong>g medication error system, proclaimed<br />

to make <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tions to reduce medication errors.<br />

A drug formulary tailored to the special needs of el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts can be a very useful<br />

tool to improve the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. Almost all of the selected<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (94.7%) had a drug formulary, whereby the national formulary for<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes ( Nationaal RVT Formularium ) was the most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly used (78.9%).<br />

Surpris<strong>in</strong>gly, 5.3% (4/76) of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home directors <strong>de</strong>clared not to have a formulary<br />

<strong>in</strong> their <strong>in</strong>stitution <strong>de</strong>spite the fact that this is legally obliged and that every nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home <strong>in</strong> Belgium annually receives a free copy of the national formulary for nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes. 31.6% of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (24/76) used an electronic prescrib<strong>in</strong>g system, for<br />

about half of them (11/24) the formulary was electronically available and for one third<br />

(8/24) the formulary drugs popped up as first choice dur<strong>in</strong>g the electronic prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

process.<br />

Nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes purchased their medication from a community pharmacy (82.9%), a<br />

hospital pharmacy (13.2%) or a wholesaler (3.9%). 63.4% of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

purchas<strong>in</strong>g medication <strong>in</strong> a community pharmacy worked with only 1 community<br />

pharmacy, 28.6% with 2 or 3, and 7.9% with 3 or more community pharmacies (see<br />

figure 3.3). For nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes work<strong>in</strong>g with more than 1 pharmacy, medication was


60 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

<strong>de</strong>livered by turns (81.8%) or simultaneously (18.2%) by the differ<strong>en</strong>t pharmacies. For<br />

the purchase of prescription drugs, 22.7% of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes had ma<strong>de</strong> a public<br />

t<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r and 33.3% ma<strong>de</strong> an <strong>in</strong>formal agreem<strong>en</strong>t with the pharmacy. For over-thecounter<br />

medication, these perc<strong>en</strong>tages were 22.7% and 34.8%, respectively.<br />

The pharmacist <strong>de</strong>livered the medication packaged per resi<strong>de</strong>nt with the resi<strong>de</strong>nt s<br />

name on each box (which is the method <strong>de</strong>scribed by law) (50%), <strong>in</strong> one bag for the<br />

ward with the resi<strong>de</strong>nt s name on each box (43.4%), per resi<strong>de</strong>nt without name (3.9%)<br />

or <strong>in</strong> one bag for the ward without names (2.6%) (see figure 3.4). In addition to<br />

disp<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>g medication, the pharmacist also provi<strong>de</strong>d an overview of the <strong>de</strong>livered<br />

medication (94.7%), provi<strong>de</strong>d drug <strong>in</strong>formation (63.2%), consulted with the nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home managem<strong>en</strong>t about the medication process (42.1%), assisted with the evaluation<br />

of the medication process (26.3%), gave advice about the medication process (38.2%),<br />

controlled the expiration dates of the drugs (11.8%) or provi<strong>de</strong>d other services (27.6%)<br />

such as the managem<strong>en</strong>t of an emerg<strong>en</strong>cy kit. This is shown <strong>in</strong> figure 3.5.<br />

Figure 3.3: Type and number of <strong>de</strong>liver<strong>in</strong>g pharmacies<br />

wholsesaler<br />

hospital<br />

pharmacy<br />

community<br />

pharmacy<br />

0 20 40 60 80 100<br />

% of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

Figure 3.4: How is the medication <strong>de</strong>livered?<br />

one bag per ward<br />

without name<br />

per resi<strong>de</strong>nt without<br />

name<br />

one bag per ward<br />

with name<br />

per resi<strong>de</strong>nt with<br />

name<br />

1<br />

2 or 3<br />

more than 3<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50 60<br />

% of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 61<br />

Figure 3.5: Services provi<strong>de</strong>d by the pharmacy<br />

other services<br />

expiration dates<br />

advice<br />

evaluation<br />

consultation<br />

drug <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

overview<br />

0 20 40 60 80 100<br />

% of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

3.4.3.4 Autonomy of resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> medication managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

More than half of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (57.9%) forba<strong>de</strong> the storage of prescription drugs<br />

<strong>in</strong> the resi<strong>de</strong>nt s room, with 74.9% of them never and 25.1% sometimes mak<strong>in</strong>g<br />

exceptions on this prohibition. Regard<strong>in</strong>g over-the-counter medication, only 30.3% of<br />

the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes forba<strong>de</strong> storage <strong>in</strong> the resi<strong>de</strong>nt s room.<br />

3.4.4 Description of the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t system at the level of the<br />

wards<br />

The medication process is the process start<strong>in</strong>g from the mom<strong>en</strong>t of prescription,<br />

through the purchase, storage, preparation and adm<strong>in</strong>istration of medication, until the<br />

follow-up of pharmacotherapy. Figure 3.6 schematically <strong>de</strong>scribes the organization of<br />

the medication process <strong>in</strong> a nurs<strong>in</strong>g home. In or<strong>de</strong>r to provi<strong>de</strong> a clear overview of all<br />

medication-related activities <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>vestigated nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, the results of this survey<br />

are <strong>de</strong>scribed per step <strong>in</strong> the medication process.


62 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Figure 3.6: Schematic overview of the medication process <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes<br />

DRUG FORMULARY<br />

EVALUATION OF<br />

MEDICATION<br />

CHART<br />

MEDICATION<br />

ADMINISTRATION<br />

MEDICATION<br />

INFORMATION<br />

3.4.4.1 Drug formulary<br />

HOSPITAL<br />

RESIDENT<br />

PRESCRIPTION<br />

MEDICATION<br />

PREPARATION<br />

ADJUSTMENT OF<br />

MEDICATION<br />

CHART AND FILE<br />

PHARMACY<br />

MEDICATION<br />

DELIVERY<br />

MEDICATION<br />

STORAGE<br />

MEDICATION<br />

AUTONOMY OF<br />

RESIDENT<br />

In or<strong>de</strong>r to <strong>en</strong>sure rational prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, the use of a drug formulary<br />

(for el<strong>de</strong>rly) is advisable. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to the s<strong>en</strong>ior nurses, a drug formulary was pres<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong><br />

91.1% (102/112) of the wards, but was only used <strong>in</strong> 63.7% (65/102) of them. This<br />

formulary was visibly pres<strong>en</strong>t at the place where the prescription was ma<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong> 66.6%<br />

(68/102) of the wards. Surpris<strong>in</strong>gly, one of the <strong>in</strong>terviewed divisional heads <strong>de</strong>clared to<br />

use the formulary while no formulary was pres<strong>en</strong>t on the ward.<br />

S<strong>en</strong>ior nurses sporadically (19.6%) or systematically (41.1%) <strong>en</strong>couraged new GPs to use<br />

the formulary. Such stimulation of formulary use seems advisable s<strong>in</strong>ce nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 63<br />

are visited by numerous GPs, each hav<strong>in</strong>g their own prescription pattern. In the<br />

majority of the wards (91.1%), the drug formulary was not b<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g, mean<strong>in</strong>g that GPs<br />

can prescribe non-formulary drugs without hav<strong>in</strong>g to motivate their choice. Nurses<br />

sporadically po<strong>in</strong>ted the GP at prescription of non-formulary drugs <strong>in</strong> 26.8% of the<br />

wards. This happ<strong>en</strong>ed systematically <strong>in</strong> 8% of the cases. At the mom<strong>en</strong>t of prescription,<br />

nurses actually pres<strong>en</strong>ted the formulary to all GPs <strong>in</strong> 14.3% of the wards, while <strong>in</strong> 4.5%<br />

of the wards, nurses only pres<strong>en</strong>ted it to GPs receptive to formulary use. The policy<br />

about drug formulary use is shown <strong>in</strong> figure 3.7.<br />

After the prescription was ma<strong>de</strong>, the GP always han<strong>de</strong>d over the prescription form to a<br />

nurse, who ma<strong>de</strong> sure that it was forwar<strong>de</strong>d to the pharmacy. In about two thirds of<br />

the wards (69.6%), nurses did not wait for a prescription before or<strong>de</strong>r<strong>in</strong>g chronic<br />

medication imply<strong>in</strong>g that the doctor had to prescribe the medication afterwards. This<br />

can have severe consequ<strong>en</strong>ces such as the cont<strong>in</strong>uation of not further <strong>in</strong>dicated<br />

medication.<br />

Figure 3.7: Policy about drug formulary use<br />

pres<strong>en</strong>t formulary<br />

po<strong>in</strong>t at prescription of<br />

non-formulary drugs<br />

formulary not b<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>en</strong>courage new GP's<br />

formulary visible<br />

formulary used<br />

formulary pres<strong>en</strong>t<br />

3.4.4.2 Medication record<br />

0 20 40 60 80 100<br />

% of the wards<br />

At admission of a new resi<strong>de</strong>nt, an anamnesis of the used medication needs to be<br />

performed. This was the task of the head nurse (60.7%), the g<strong>en</strong>eral practitioner<br />

(43.8%), the nurse responsible for the resi<strong>de</strong>nt (43.8%), or another person (9.8%, ma<strong>in</strong>ly<br />

the nurse pres<strong>en</strong>t at the admission time or the social services). This anamnesis was used<br />

to draw up a medication chart, which was done for every s<strong>in</strong>gle resi<strong>de</strong>nt <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home on a standard form (the medication form was standardized <strong>in</strong> 98.7% of the<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes). This medication chart was still handwritt<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> 21.4% of the wards. The<br />

majority (88.6%) of the wards disposed of an electronic medication chart, which was a<br />

self <strong>de</strong>veloped mo<strong>de</strong>l (e.g. Excel file) <strong>in</strong> one third of the cases or <strong>de</strong>veloped by a<br />

software company <strong>in</strong> two thirds. In 55% of the wards, the <strong>en</strong>tire pati<strong>en</strong>t nurs<strong>in</strong>g record<br />

(<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g a copy of the medication chart and the nurs<strong>in</strong>g file, the care plan, a diary ...)<br />

was computerized.<br />

Medication charts can conta<strong>in</strong> up to 13 items: brand name, g<strong>en</strong>eric name, dose, gal<strong>en</strong>ic<br />

form, adm<strong>in</strong>istration route, adm<strong>in</strong>istration frequ<strong>en</strong>cy (times per day), adm<strong>in</strong>istration<br />

time, adm<strong>in</strong>istration mom<strong>en</strong>t (before or after a meal), a blank for specific <strong>in</strong>structions,<br />

start date, stop date, the differ<strong>en</strong>ce betwe<strong>en</strong> chronic and acute medication, and PRN<br />

(pro re nata, as nee<strong>de</strong>d ) medication. 9 of these 13 items are legally mandatory, 4<br />

(g<strong>en</strong>eric name, adm<strong>in</strong>istration mom<strong>en</strong>t, the differ<strong>en</strong>ce betwe<strong>en</strong> chronic and acute<br />

sporadically<br />

systematically


64 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

medication and the blank for specific <strong>in</strong>structions) are optional. In 30.4% of the wards,<br />

the chart conta<strong>in</strong>ed less than the 9 mandatory items. The other 69.6% had ev<strong>en</strong> more<br />

items than the 9 mandatory ones on the medication charts. The most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly<br />

omitted items were the g<strong>en</strong>eric name (abs<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> 71.4%) and the differ<strong>en</strong>ce betwe<strong>en</strong><br />

chronic and acute medication (abs<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> 68.8%). Next to the daily oral medication,<br />

medication charts could also list medication that needs to be tak<strong>en</strong> once a week (100%),<br />

ear or eye drops (92.9%), <strong>in</strong>jections (99.1%), <strong>de</strong>rmatologic preparations (67.9%) and<br />

rectal medication (93.8%). In 57.1% of the wards, medication charts were controlled on<br />

complet<strong>en</strong>ess and correctness by a third person.<br />

At every new prescription, the GP filled <strong>in</strong> the prescribed medication <strong>in</strong> the medical file<br />

of the resi<strong>de</strong>nt (<strong>in</strong> 93.8% of the cases) while the nurse did the same <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g file<br />

(95.5%). The medication chart was also adjusted at every new prescription. A new<br />

handwritt<strong>en</strong> medication chart was filled <strong>in</strong>: at each change <strong>in</strong> the therapy (12%), weekly<br />

(12%), twice a month (8%), monthly (52%) or less than once a month (16%). A new<br />

electronic medication chart was filled <strong>in</strong> and pr<strong>in</strong>ted out: at each change <strong>in</strong> the therapy<br />

(3.4%), weekly (17%), twice a month (33%), monthly (45.5%) or less than once <strong>in</strong> a<br />

month (1.1%).<br />

3.4.4.3 Medication <strong>de</strong>livery<br />

For more <strong>de</strong>tails on the disp<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>g pharmacy and on how the medication was <strong>de</strong>livered<br />

to the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home, we refer to subhead<strong>in</strong>g 3.4.3.3. The <strong>de</strong>livered medication was<br />

checked on correctness <strong>in</strong> 88.4% of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. This happ<strong>en</strong>ed ma<strong>in</strong>ly at the<br />

mom<strong>en</strong>t of <strong>de</strong>livery (79.5%), us<strong>in</strong>g either the or<strong>de</strong>r form (59.8%) or the prescription<br />

form (16.1%).<br />

3.4.4.4 Medication storage<br />

In 35.5% of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, medication was stocked <strong>in</strong> one c<strong>en</strong>tral location <strong>in</strong> the<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home. By co<strong>in</strong>ci<strong>de</strong>nce, this c<strong>en</strong>tral location could happ<strong>en</strong> to be on the<br />

<strong>in</strong>terviewed ward, which resulted <strong>in</strong> 98.2% of the wards stat<strong>in</strong>g to have a storage place<br />

for the medication of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts. In 32.7% of the cases, this was <strong>in</strong> a separate room<br />

only for the purpose of stor<strong>in</strong>g drugs. To prev<strong>en</strong>t misuse, the medication should not be<br />

accessible for resi<strong>de</strong>nts. In spite of this common s<strong>en</strong>se, the medication room was never<br />

locked <strong>in</strong> 25.9% of the cases and <strong>in</strong> 30.4% the cupboard where the drugs were stored<br />

was never locked. In 6.3% of the wards, neither the storage room nor the cupboard<br />

was locked. Most of the wards had a separate storage place for narcotics at their<br />

disposal (88.4%) as well as a fridge used for drugs requir<strong>in</strong>g cool storage (81.3%). The<br />

amount of available stock (81.3%) and the expiration dates of the drugs (88.4%) were<br />

controlled on a regular basis by nurses.<br />

In 46.4% of the wards, there was a back-up stock of medication while 30.4% of the<br />

wards could use a back-up stock available for the <strong>en</strong>tire nurs<strong>in</strong>g home. Wh<strong>en</strong> such<br />

stock existed, there was a responsible <strong>in</strong> 79.1% of the cases. These stocks were<br />

orig<strong>in</strong>ated from or<strong>de</strong>rs to the pharmacy (16.3%), excess medication (93%), free samples<br />

(3.5%) or from <strong>de</strong>ceased resi<strong>de</strong>nts (22.3%). In 24.4%, there was a logbook <strong>in</strong> or<strong>de</strong>r to<br />

register <strong>in</strong>com<strong>in</strong>g and outgo<strong>in</strong>g medication from this back-up stock. The amount of<br />

available stock and the expiration dates of the drugs were checked just as for the<br />

regular medication, <strong>in</strong> 59.3% and 94.2% of the wards respectively.<br />

85.7% of the wards had an emerg<strong>en</strong>cy kit conta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g life sav<strong>in</strong>g medication. In 93.8% of<br />

the cases, a responsible for this emerg<strong>en</strong>cy reserve had be<strong>en</strong> assigned. Emerg<strong>en</strong>cy kits<br />

were composed by the medical coord<strong>in</strong>ator ( CRA ) (75.9%), the GPs (6.3%), the<br />

pharmacist(s) (20.5%) and the s<strong>en</strong>ior nurses (35.7%). The results of the topic of<br />

medication storage are shown <strong>in</strong> figure 3.8.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 65<br />

Figure 3.8: Medication storage<br />

emerg<strong>en</strong>cy kit<br />

back-up stock for the<br />

<strong>en</strong>tire nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

back-up stock for the ward<br />

control of expiration dates<br />

control of stock<br />

separate fridge for medication<br />

separate storage for narcotics<br />

room nor cupboard locked<br />

cupboard not locked<br />

room not locked<br />

separate room for medication<br />

storage place for medication<br />

3.4.4.5 Preparation of the medication<br />

0 20 40 60 80 100 120<br />

% of the wards<br />

Before disp<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>g to the resi<strong>de</strong>nts, the medication was prepared (mean<strong>in</strong>g that tablets<br />

were tak<strong>en</strong> out of their packages and were put on a tray per resi<strong>de</strong>nt <strong>in</strong> or<strong>de</strong>r to<br />

facilitate the adm<strong>in</strong>istration) us<strong>in</strong>g the medication chart (94.6%) or a list copied from the<br />

medication chart (5.4%). The medication was prepared for 1 day (71.4%), half a week<br />

(12.5%) or 1 week (16.1%) by nurses (99.1%) and / or care aids (11.6%). Belgian law<br />

states that medication should be prepared maximum 24 hours before adm<strong>in</strong>istration<br />

and that this preparation should always be performed or supervised by nurses.<br />

Preparation could happ<strong>en</strong> at night (41.1%), dur<strong>in</strong>g the day (46.4%) or both (12.5%). In<br />

92.9% of the cases, the person who prepared the medications was recor<strong>de</strong>d. In 13.4%,<br />

the person prepar<strong>in</strong>g medication also checked if the drugs were prepared correctly and<br />

<strong>in</strong> 48.2%, this control was performed by a colleague (see figure 3.9).<br />

At the mom<strong>en</strong>t of preparation, tablets and capsules were already removed from their<br />

blister <strong>in</strong> 77.7% of the wards. However, some other gal<strong>en</strong>ic forms were prepared<br />

immediately before adm<strong>in</strong>istration. This was the fact for solutions (84.8%), effervesc<strong>en</strong>t<br />

tablets (78.6%), pow<strong>de</strong>r bags (95.5%), and medication that requires cool storage<br />

(93.8%). This medication was checked on correctness by the same person (36.9%) or by<br />

a colleague (22.5%).


66 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

prepared both night & day<br />

Figure 3.9: Medication preparation<br />

removed from blister<br />

double check<br />

record of who prepared<br />

prepared dur<strong>in</strong>g the day<br />

prepared at night<br />

prepared for 1 week<br />

prepared for half a week<br />

prepared for 1 day<br />

3.4.4.6 Information about medication<br />

0 20 40 60 80 100<br />

% of the wards<br />

by the same person<br />

by a colleague<br />

To <strong>en</strong>sure correct medication use, nurses need to search <strong>in</strong>formation about a specific<br />

drug (adm<strong>in</strong>istration route, crushability, ). As drug <strong>in</strong>formation sources, 5.4% had the<br />

gecomm<strong>en</strong>tarieerd g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>repertorium (comm<strong>en</strong>ted medication repertory)<br />

at their disposal, 20.5% had the comp<strong>en</strong>dium of the pharmaceutical <strong>in</strong>dustry (which is<br />

a compilation of sci<strong>en</strong>tific medic<strong>in</strong>es packages <strong>in</strong>serts) and 71.4% had both. Internet was<br />

available <strong>in</strong> only 17% of the wards.<br />

Other important sources of professional <strong>in</strong>formation were the caregivers regularly<br />

<strong>in</strong>volved with the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home. Information could be asked at the pharmacist (85.7%)<br />

or at the GP or medical coord<strong>in</strong>ator ( CRA ) (96.4%). 18.8% of the nurses kept the<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>t package <strong>in</strong>serts of medic<strong>in</strong>es but did rarely use them. 8% kept the pati<strong>en</strong>t<br />

package <strong>in</strong>serts and used them on a regular basis.<br />

Nurses did sometimes give <strong>in</strong>formation to m<strong>en</strong>tally <strong>in</strong>tact resi<strong>de</strong>nts about their<br />

medication. On 48.5% of the wards, <strong>in</strong>formation about the <strong>in</strong>dication and the <strong>in</strong>take was<br />

provi<strong>de</strong>d systematically to the resi<strong>de</strong>nts. But the <strong>in</strong>formation about si<strong>de</strong> effects was<br />

restricted to certa<strong>in</strong> drugs (48.5%).<br />

On almost every ward (99.1%), medication was crushed (ma<strong>in</strong>ly to facilitate the<br />

swallow<strong>in</strong>g). Crush<strong>in</strong>g of dosage forms can seriously alter the release pattern of the<br />

drug. For example, crushed <strong>en</strong>teric coated formulations release their drug <strong>in</strong> the<br />

stomach, while crushed susta<strong>in</strong>ed release formulations release all their drug at once<br />

( dose dump<strong>in</strong>g ). However, nurses consulted <strong>in</strong>formation before crush<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> only 21.4%<br />

of the cases. Wh<strong>en</strong> the nurses did consult some <strong>in</strong>formation source, they consulted the<br />

medical coord<strong>in</strong>ator ( CRA ) (64.3%), the pharmacist (33%) or the package <strong>in</strong>serts of<br />

medic<strong>in</strong>es (29.5%).<br />

3.4.4.7 Adm<strong>in</strong>istration of medication<br />

Only nurses are legally allowed to adm<strong>in</strong>ister drugs to the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts. On<br />

all of the wards, nurses were <strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>ed <strong>in</strong>volved with the adm<strong>in</strong>istration of medications.<br />

However, the <strong>in</strong>terviewed head nurses proclaimed that the medications were also<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istered to the resi<strong>de</strong>nts by care aids (67%) or nurs<strong>in</strong>g stu<strong>de</strong>nts (12.5%). This<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istration was recor<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> 80.2% of the wards.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 67<br />

m<strong>en</strong>tally impaired resi<strong>de</strong>nts:<br />

control on <strong>in</strong>take<br />

For m<strong>en</strong>tally <strong>in</strong>tact el<strong>de</strong>rly, the <strong>in</strong>take was visually controlled afterwards (i.e. control if<br />

the drugs had disappeared ) for 74.7% and by swallow<strong>in</strong>g (the nurse waited at the<br />

bedsi<strong>de</strong> of the resi<strong>de</strong>nt until the medication had be<strong>en</strong> swallowed) <strong>in</strong> 19.2%. For m<strong>en</strong>tally<br />

impaired resi<strong>de</strong>nts, these perc<strong>en</strong>tages were 0.9% and 99.1% respectively (see<br />

figure 3.10). The medication <strong>in</strong>take was most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly recor<strong>de</strong>d only <strong>in</strong> the case wh<strong>en</strong><br />

the resi<strong>de</strong>nt did not take the medications (83.9% for m<strong>en</strong>tally <strong>in</strong>tact and 82.1% for<br />

m<strong>en</strong>tally impaired resi<strong>de</strong>nts).<br />

Figure 3.10: Medication adm<strong>in</strong>istration<br />

m<strong>en</strong>tally <strong>in</strong>tact resi<strong>de</strong>nts:<br />

control on <strong>in</strong>take<br />

record of adm<strong>in</strong>istration<br />

by nurs<strong>in</strong>g stu<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

3.4.4.8 Evaluation of Pharmacotherapy<br />

From time to time, nurses evaluated the medication chart <strong>in</strong> consultation with the GP.<br />

They assessed together if the medication was still <strong>in</strong>dicated and appropriate, if the dose<br />

or gal<strong>en</strong>ic form nee<strong>de</strong>d to be adapted and if other drugs nee<strong>de</strong>d to be ad<strong>de</strong>d. This<br />

happ<strong>en</strong>ed sporadically (wh<strong>en</strong>ever therapy problems occurred) <strong>in</strong> 33.9% and systematically<br />

<strong>in</strong> 66.1% of the wards.<br />

3.4.4.9 Resi<strong>de</strong>nt autonomy <strong>in</strong> medication managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

3.4.4.10 Hospital<br />

by care aids<br />

0 20 40 60 80 100 120<br />

% of wards<br />

visually<br />

swallow<strong>in</strong>g<br />

On average, 2.6% of the pati<strong>en</strong>ts on the <strong>in</strong>vestigated wards (range: 0 to 17%) were<br />

completely autonomous regard<strong>in</strong>g their medication: 14.6% of them (range: 0 to 98.5%)<br />

took their drugs without control on the <strong>in</strong>take and 83.2% (range: 0 to 100%) with control<br />

on the <strong>in</strong>take.<br />

Wh<strong>en</strong> there were autonomous people on the ward, 80% of them got a medication<br />

chart like all the other resi<strong>de</strong>nts. The nurses also controlled the amount of available<br />

stock <strong>in</strong> the room of autonomous resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> 22% of the wards and the expiration date<br />

of the drugs <strong>in</strong> 24%.<br />

Wh<strong>en</strong> a resi<strong>de</strong>nt nee<strong>de</strong>d to be admitted to the hospital, the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home always<br />

(100%) provi<strong>de</strong>d an overview of the curr<strong>en</strong>tly tak<strong>en</strong> medication of that resi<strong>de</strong>nt.


68 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Keypo<strong>in</strong>ts<br />

A drug formulary was pres<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> 91% of wards <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes but<br />

only 2 out of 3 wards were us<strong>in</strong>g the formulary effectively.<br />

In 79% of the wards the medication chart was electronically produced.<br />

Chronic medication was oft<strong>en</strong> or<strong>de</strong>red without a prescription of the GP<br />

which makes critical appraisal of polypharmacy and alterations unlikely. In<br />

2/3 of wards, the appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess of medication was systematically assessed<br />

from time to time by nurse and GP.<br />

The correctness of medication <strong>de</strong>livery was checked <strong>in</strong> over 8/10 of nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes.<br />

On several po<strong>in</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> the preparation and adm<strong>in</strong>istration of medication, legal<br />

standards were not always followed. In the majority of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

medication was also adm<strong>in</strong>istered by other personnel than qualified nurses.<br />

About two third of wards met the legal obligations for medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t.<br />

3.4.5 Assessm<strong>en</strong>t of the quality of the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t system<br />

3.4.5.1 At the level of the <strong>in</strong>stitution<br />

The mean total score for the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home managem<strong>en</strong>t was +0.05, with 39.5% of the<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home managem<strong>en</strong>t not meet<strong>in</strong>g the legal obligations concern<strong>in</strong>g the medication<br />

process, and half of them (51.3%) scor<strong>in</strong>g positively. Best doma<strong>in</strong> scores were obta<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

for the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t (56.6% > 0), and worst scores for the pharmacy (36.8%<br />

< 0). The scores for the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home managem<strong>en</strong>t ranged betwe<strong>en</strong> -12 and +7. For<br />

further <strong>de</strong>tails, see table 3.7 below. The scores are also displayed as box plot <strong>in</strong><br />

figure 3.11. Correlations betwe<strong>en</strong> the differ<strong>en</strong>t doma<strong>in</strong>s were also assessed.<br />

Table 3.7: Doma<strong>in</strong> and total scores for the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

doma<strong>in</strong> mean 25th 75th range % 0<br />

perc<strong>en</strong>tile perc<strong>en</strong>tile<br />

m<strong>in</strong> max<br />

medication managem<strong>en</strong>t 0,5921 -1.75 4 -8 6 32,9 56,6<br />

formulary -0,3947 -3 0 -6 4 26,3 15,8<br />

pharmacy -0,1447 -1 0.75 -3 2 36,8 25<br />

TOTAL 0,0526 -3 4 -12 7 39,5 51,3<br />

Note: %0<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicates the frequ<strong>en</strong>cy of <strong>in</strong>stitutions with more than legally obliged activities; all rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutions had a score of zero.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 69<br />

Figure 3.11: Box plots of the doma<strong>in</strong> and total scores for the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

3.4.5.2 At the level of the wards<br />

Pharmacy<br />

Formulary<br />

Medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

-8,00 -6,00 -4,00 -2,00 0,00 2,00 4,00 6,00<br />

The mean total score for the wards was +2.81, with 32.1% not meet<strong>in</strong>g the legal<br />

obligations. The most common shortages were situated at the doma<strong>in</strong>s medication<br />

storage and medication preparation , and formulary . 64.3% of the wards had a<br />

positive total score. The best scores were obta<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> the doma<strong>in</strong>s of communication<br />

and <strong>in</strong>formation. The total scores ranged betwe<strong>en</strong> -20 and +23. These results are<br />

<strong>de</strong>tailed <strong>in</strong> table 3.8 and shown as box plot <strong>in</strong> figure 3.12 below.<br />

Statistically significant correlations were found betwe<strong>en</strong> work procedures and formulary<br />

(p=0.000), preparation of medication and formulary (p=0.003) and adm<strong>in</strong>istration of<br />

medication and <strong>in</strong>formation about medication (p=0.008). Unfortunately, these<br />

correlations have no logical or factor-related mean<strong>in</strong>g.


70 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Table 3.8: Doma<strong>in</strong> and total scores for the wards<br />

doma<strong>in</strong> mean 25th 75th<br />

range % 0<br />

perc<strong>en</strong>tile perc<strong>en</strong>tile<br />

m<strong>in</strong> max<br />

Work procedures 0,0893 0 1 -1 1 24,1 33<br />

formulary -1,375 -3 1 -7 6 59,8 29,5<br />

communication 1,9821 0 3 0 3 / 66,1<br />

medication record 0,3125 -1 3 -8 6 36,6 44,6<br />

storage -2,125 -4 0 -8 1 60,7 17<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt autonomy 0,5625 0 1 0 3 / 36,6<br />

preparation -1,9107 -4 0 -9 4 66,1 23,3<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istration -0,3571 -1.75 1 -5 2 33,9 36,6<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation 5,6339 5 7 -2 8 1,8 97,3<br />

TOTAL 2,8125 2 9 -20 23 32,1 64,3<br />

Note: %0<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicates the frequ<strong>en</strong>cy of <strong>in</strong>stitutions with more than legally obliged activities; all rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutions had a score of zero.<br />

Information<br />

Adm<strong>in</strong>istration<br />

Preparation<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

autonomy<br />

Storage<br />

Medication<br />

record<br />

Communication<br />

Formulary<br />

Work procedures<br />

Figure 3.12: Box plots of the doma<strong>in</strong> and total scores for the wards<br />

3.4.6 Description of selected resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

At resi<strong>de</strong>nts level, 2,510 subjects with adm<strong>in</strong>istrative data and a medication chart<br />

available were <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d for analysis.<br />

3.4.6.1 Age and g<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r<br />

-10,00 -8,00 -6,00 -4,00 -2,00 0,00 2,00 4,00 6,00 8,00 10,00<br />

Mean age of resi<strong>de</strong>nts was 84.8 years (range 36-104) with 77.4% wom<strong>en</strong>. In figure 3.13<br />

we pres<strong>en</strong>t a histogram of the age distribution of resi<strong>de</strong>nts with a bimodal curve,


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 71<br />

pres<strong>en</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g a dip <strong>in</strong> the distribution <strong>in</strong> the age group 90 to 93 years old, due to the dip <strong>in</strong><br />

nativity dur<strong>in</strong>g World War I.<br />

Figure 3.13: Age distribution of <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d resi<strong>de</strong>nts (N=2510)<br />

Number Number of of resi<strong>de</strong>nts resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

400<br />

350<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

150<br />

100<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

30 40 50 60 70 80 90 90 100 100 110<br />

110<br />

age<br />

In figure 3.14 the <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g perc<strong>en</strong>tage of female resi<strong>de</strong>nts with <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g age is<br />

pres<strong>en</strong>ted. Among sexag<strong>en</strong>arians, 50% of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts are female, while this perc<strong>en</strong>tage<br />

rises to 82% wom<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> the resi<strong>de</strong>nts of 90 to 99 years old.<br />

Figure 3.14: Perc<strong>en</strong>tage of female resi<strong>de</strong>nts accord<strong>in</strong>g to age<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage of female resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />


72 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Figure 3.15: Number of cl<strong>in</strong>ical problems accord<strong>in</strong>g to age<br />

By contrast, there was a net <strong>in</strong>crease of the number of care problems with age, with the<br />

median number of care problems progress<strong>in</strong>g from 2 to 4 (see figure 3.16)<br />

Figure 3.16: Care problems accord<strong>in</strong>g to age<br />

Number of care problems<br />

12<br />

10<br />

3.4.6.2 Adm<strong>in</strong>istrative characteristics<br />

8<br />

6<br />

4<br />

2<br />

0<br />


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 73<br />

3.4.6.3 Case mix<br />

Welfare support (OCMW/CPAS) with out-of-pocket exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for medication paid<br />

by the local social security system.<br />

In Belgian nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, a cru<strong>de</strong> system for allocat<strong>in</strong>g case-mix categories to resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

is used. This system is the basis for the <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>ation of the per diem fund<strong>in</strong>g of nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes. It is based on a mixture of a four gra<strong>de</strong> <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy scale and the pres<strong>en</strong>ce or<br />

abs<strong>en</strong>ce of <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia.<br />

In table 3.9 the distribution of resi<strong>de</strong>nts over these case-mix categories and their<br />

<strong>de</strong>scription is giv<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Table 3.9: Distribution of resi<strong>de</strong>nts over the Belgian <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy categories<br />

accord<strong>in</strong>g to the Katz scale (N=2,520)<br />

Belgian Case-<br />

Mix Class<br />

Description Perc<strong>en</strong>tage of resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

Katz O Cognitive fit and physically <strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt 6.1%<br />

Katz A M<strong>in</strong>or physical <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy a , not <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>t OR<br />

<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>t and physically <strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt<br />

15.0%<br />

Katz B Major physical <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy b , not <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>t OR<br />

<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>t and m<strong>in</strong>or physical <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy<br />

18.5%<br />

Katz C Full physical <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy c , not <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>t 12.0%<br />

Katz Cd Full <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy and <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>t 48.4%<br />

Total 100.0%<br />

a<br />

M<strong>in</strong>or physical <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy: <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt for wash<strong>in</strong>g and cloth<strong>in</strong>g<br />

b Major physical <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy: a + <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy for mobility and bathroom<br />

c Full physical <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy: a + b + <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy for <strong>in</strong>cont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>ce and/or feed<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Poly-pathology was observed <strong>in</strong> most resi<strong>de</strong>nts with cl<strong>in</strong>ical problems diagnosed by the<br />

GP rang<strong>in</strong>g from 0 (9%) to 12 with a mean of 2.6 problems. Cardio-vascular pathology<br />

was most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly observed (see figure 3.17). Additionally, resi<strong>de</strong>nts had betwe<strong>en</strong> 0<br />

(11%) and 15 care problems with a mean of 2.7 care problems. The highest frequ<strong>en</strong>cy<br />

was observed for fall risk, <strong>in</strong>somnia and constipation (see figure 3.18).


74 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Figure 3.17: Frequ<strong>en</strong>cy of pathological problems<br />

Other<br />

Other<br />

disor<strong>de</strong>rs<br />

disor<strong>de</strong>rs<br />

Cardio-<br />

Cardio<br />

vascular<br />

vascular<br />

Gout<br />

Convulsion<br />

Glaucoma<br />

Park<strong>in</strong>son<br />

Prostate<br />

Diabetes<br />

COPD<br />

Peptic ulcer<br />

Ang<strong>in</strong>a<br />

Vascular disease<br />

Post-<strong>in</strong>farct<br />

Heart failure<br />

Hypert<strong>en</strong>sion<br />

Figure 3.18: Frequ<strong>en</strong>cy of care problems<br />

Liver failure<br />

Decubitus<br />

Malnutrition (BMI30)<br />

R<strong>en</strong>al failure<br />

Osteoporosis<br />

Chronic pa<strong>in</strong><br />

Incont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>ce<br />

Constipation<br />

Insomnia<br />

Fall risk<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50 60<br />

% of resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50<br />

% of resi<strong>de</strong>nts


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 75<br />

The treat<strong>in</strong>g physician categorized 46% of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts as <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>ted, and 35% as<br />

<strong>de</strong>pressed. The overlap betwe<strong>en</strong> the two diseases is shown <strong>in</strong> figure 3.19. Only 35% of<br />

the resi<strong>de</strong>nts were free of either <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia or <strong>de</strong>pression, 16% suffered from both<br />

affections, 30% was <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>ted without <strong>de</strong>pression and 19% <strong>de</strong>pressed without<br />

<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia.<br />

Figure 3.19: V<strong>en</strong>n-diagram of <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia and <strong>de</strong>pression as assessed by the<br />

treat<strong>in</strong>g physician (N=1730)<br />

30<br />

%<br />

16 19<br />

Dem<strong>en</strong>te Depresse<br />

14% had a fatal diagnosis with palliative care <strong>in</strong>stalled <strong>in</strong> 9% of resi<strong>de</strong>nts, of which 3%<br />

were <strong>in</strong> term<strong>in</strong>al phase (see figure 3.20).<br />

Figure 3.20: Distribution of palliative and term<strong>in</strong>al care pati<strong>en</strong>ts (N=1730)<br />

4,7<br />

5,7 3,2<br />

4,7<br />

5,7 3,2<br />

4,7<br />

5,7 3,2<br />

fatal diagnosis,<br />

<strong>in</strong> palliative care,<br />

not <strong>in</strong> term<strong>in</strong>al care yet<br />

fatal diagnosis <strong>in</strong> term<strong>in</strong>al care<br />

fatal diagnosis,<br />

not <strong>in</strong> palliative care yet<br />

4,7<br />

5,7 3,2<br />

4,7<br />

5,7 3,2<br />

4,7<br />

5,7 3,2<br />

4,7<br />

5,7 3,2<br />

fatal diagnosis,<br />

<strong>in</strong> palliative care,<br />

not <strong>in</strong> term<strong>in</strong>al care yet<br />

fatal diagnosis <strong>in</strong> term<strong>in</strong>al care<br />

fatal diagnosis,<br />

not <strong>in</strong> palliative care yet<br />

86,4<br />

no fatal diagnosis


76 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Keypo<strong>in</strong>ts<br />

The majority of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts were females (77.4%) and had a mean of 2.6<br />

cl<strong>in</strong>ical problems that was constant over all age categories. In contrast, the<br />

number of care problems <strong>in</strong>creased from 2 to 4 <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g on age.<br />

6 out of 10 resi<strong>de</strong>nts were eligible for lower co-paym<strong>en</strong>ts (prefer<strong>en</strong>tial<br />

treatm<strong>en</strong>t) and <strong>in</strong> 14% of resi<strong>de</strong>nts out-of-pocket paym<strong>en</strong>ts were <strong>de</strong>alt with<br />

by the OCMW/CPAS.<br />

Accord<strong>in</strong>g to the treat<strong>in</strong>g physicians, nearly half of resi<strong>de</strong>nts had <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia<br />

and over 1/3 was <strong>de</strong>pressed. 1 out of 10 was receiv<strong>in</strong>g palliative care.<br />

3.4.7 Description of the medication used<br />

We collected the medication charts of 2,510 resi<strong>de</strong>nts with an average of 8.1 <strong>en</strong>tries<br />

per medication chart, result<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a total of 20,275 recor<strong>de</strong>d <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es (no <strong>en</strong>trys l<strong>in</strong>es<br />

for pati<strong>en</strong>ts with no medication).<br />

3.4.7.1 Cru<strong>de</strong> consumption<br />

Of the 20,275 <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es on the medication charts, 88% were for chronic medication,<br />

3% for acute medication, and 9% on an as nee<strong>de</strong>d basis. 94% of the <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es were<br />

for officially registered medications. Of the 6% <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es which were not officially<br />

registered medications, 3% were for magistral preparations, copy<strong>in</strong>g officially registered<br />

medications; 1.4% were for other magistral preparations; 1.4% for topical preparations<br />

not registered as medication; 0.1% for complem<strong>en</strong>tary medic<strong>in</strong>es and 0.1% for<br />

parapharmacy.<br />

Entry l<strong>in</strong>es for oral medication accounted for 88% of the <strong>en</strong>tries, <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es for other<br />

systemic medication for 7%, and <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es for topical or <strong>in</strong>stillation medication for 5%.<br />

A prescription from the physician was nee<strong>de</strong>d for 71% of the <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es, and 57% of the<br />

<strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es were for reimbursable medication. Of these <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es for reimbursed<br />

medication (N=11,546), 19% were for brand drugs without g<strong>en</strong>eric alternative, 53%<br />

were for brand drugs with a g<strong>en</strong>eric alternative available, but priced above the refer<strong>en</strong>ce<br />

price, and 28% for g<strong>en</strong>erics or brands below the refer<strong>en</strong>ce price.<br />

3.4.7.2 Medication usage per resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

Volume<br />

Very few (0.9%) resi<strong>de</strong>nts had no medication; 16.6% had 1 to 4 <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es on the<br />

medication chart; 49.5% had 5 to 9 <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es; 27.6% had 10 to 14 <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es, and 5,5%<br />

had more than 14 <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es (up to a maximum of 22).<br />

Wh<strong>en</strong> the analysis was limited to chronic medication, these frequ<strong>en</strong>cies slightly changed:<br />

1.1% resi<strong>de</strong>nts had no medication; 22.7% had 1 to 4 chronic medications; 53.1% had<br />

5 to 9 chronic medications; 20.8% had 10 to 14 chronic medications, and 2.1% had<br />

more than 14 chronic medications (up to a maximum of 22).<br />

Only 15.1% of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts were on a course of acute treatm<strong>en</strong>t at the mom<strong>en</strong>t of<br />

observation (10.2% on one acute medication, 4.8% on more than one acute medication,<br />

with a maximum of 6).<br />

With regard to medication on an as nee<strong>de</strong>d basis, 44.7% of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts had at least<br />

one such <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>e on the medication chart (25.9% one medication, 19.9% on more<br />

th<strong>en</strong> one acute medication, with a maximum of 7).<br />

In figure 3.21, an overview <strong>in</strong> boxplots is giv<strong>en</strong> of these data on chronic, acute and as<br />

nee<strong>de</strong>d medication.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 77<br />

Number Number of of prescriptions<br />

prescriptions<br />

Figure 3.21: Number of medications per pati<strong>en</strong>t for chronic, acute, and as<br />

nee<strong>de</strong>d medication (N=2510)<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

chronic acute if nee<strong>de</strong>d<br />

The median (P25-P75) number of <strong>en</strong>try l<strong>in</strong>es on the medication chart was 8(5-10), of<br />

chronic medications 7(5-10), of oral and systemic medications (e.g. par<strong>en</strong>teral or<br />

trans<strong>de</strong>rmal) 7(5-9), of only oral medications 7(4-9), of only medications which need a<br />

prescription 6(4-8), of reimbursed medication 4(3-6). We calculated the preval<strong>en</strong>ce of<br />

the usage of major therapeutic groups among resi<strong>de</strong>nts of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes <strong>in</strong> Belgium <strong>in</strong><br />

figure 3.22.


78 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Figure 3.22: Preval<strong>en</strong>ce of medication usage per therapeutic group <strong>in</strong><br />

Belgian nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (N=2,510)<br />

M01: nsaids<br />

C10: stat<strong>in</strong>es<br />

N04: park<strong>in</strong>son<br />

A10: diabetica<br />

C08: calciumantagonists<br />

C01D: vasodilators<br />

A11: vitam<strong>in</strong>es<br />

C07: betablockers<br />

C09: ace-<strong>in</strong>hibitors<br />

A02: anti-ulcer<br />

B01AC: aspir<strong>in</strong>e<br />

C03: diuretics<br />

N02: analgisics<br />

N06: anti<strong>de</strong>pressants<br />

A06: laxativa<br />

N05: psycholeptica<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage of resi<strong>de</strong>nts us<strong>in</strong>g the class of medication<br />

One medication more than one<br />

The variation <strong>in</strong> the consumption of chronic medic<strong>in</strong>es among <strong>in</strong>stitutions was<br />

consi<strong>de</strong>rable. In figure 3.23, we pres<strong>en</strong>t the results from one prov<strong>in</strong>ce (Antwerp<strong>en</strong>) to<br />

illustrate this wi<strong>de</strong> variation with the median of the number of drugs per resi<strong>de</strong>nt with<strong>in</strong><br />

each <strong>in</strong>stitution rang<strong>in</strong>g from 5 to 13. The range of the perc<strong>en</strong>tages of resi<strong>de</strong>nts treated<br />

with a specific therapeutic class was substantial for a number of classes, such as<br />

anti<strong>de</strong>pressants (19% to 48%), NSAIDs (0% to 26%), Vasodilators (0% to 40%).


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 79<br />

Figure 3.23: Consumption of chronic medic<strong>in</strong>es per nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

Antwerp<strong>en</strong><br />

A002<br />

A109<br />

A007<br />

A013<br />

A125<br />

A113<br />

A061<br />

A018<br />

A029<br />

A037<br />

A120<br />

A032<br />

A047<br />

A137<br />

A015<br />

A077<br />

A102<br />

A024<br />

A034<br />

A141<br />

A027<br />

A064<br />

A081<br />

A016<br />

A074<br />

A094<br />

A068<br />

A002<br />

A109<br />

A007<br />

A013<br />

A125<br />

A113<br />

A061<br />

A018<br />

A029<br />

A037<br />

A120<br />

A032<br />

A047<br />

A137<br />

A015<br />

A077<br />

A102<br />

A024<br />

A034<br />

A141<br />

A027<br />

A064<br />

A081<br />

A016<br />

A074<br />

A094<br />

A068<br />

The number of chronic medication per resi<strong>de</strong>nt was of course strongly correlated with<br />

the number of diseases listed for each resi<strong>de</strong>nt, as there were more medications with<br />

<strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g polypathology (Pearson Correlation Coeffici<strong>en</strong>t .534, p= .001).<br />

Exp<strong>en</strong>ditures<br />

OCMW small<br />

OCMW large<br />

Private small<br />

Private large<br />

0 5 10 15 20 25<br />

Number of chronic medication per resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

The total mean exp<strong>en</strong>diture per month and per resi<strong>de</strong>nt for chronic medication was<br />

estimated at 140 (SD 125) € (see figure 3.24). Of this total, mean public exp<strong>en</strong>diture for<br />

chronic reimbursed medication was 90 (SD 115) €, mean co-paym<strong>en</strong>t for chronic<br />

reimbursed medication was 23 (SD 17) € and mean out-of-pocket paym<strong>en</strong>t for nonreimbursed<br />

chronic medication was 27 (SD 30) € (see figure 3.25). In figure 3.26, an<br />

overview is giv<strong>en</strong> of the variation and ext<strong>en</strong>t of the 3 types of exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for chronic<br />

medication: public exp<strong>en</strong>ditures by the health <strong>in</strong>surer, co-paym<strong>en</strong>t for reimbursed<br />

medication by the pati<strong>en</strong>t, and out-of-pocket exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for non-reimbursed<br />

medication. 29% was cheap medication. Additionally, total mean exp<strong>en</strong>diture for acute<br />

medication was 17 (SD 24) €.


80 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Figure 3.24: Total exp<strong>en</strong>diture for chronic medication per resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

Exp<strong>en</strong>diture per month (€)<br />

1000<br />

900<br />

800<br />

700<br />

600<br />

500<br />

400<br />

300<br />

200<br />

100<br />

0<br />

Total exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for chronic medication per month<br />

(at ex-pharmacy retail price)<br />

Figure 3.25 : Mean exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for chronic medication<br />

Mean exp<strong>en</strong>diture per month (€)<br />

140<br />

120<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

Out-of-pocket exp<strong>en</strong>ditures<br />

for non-reimbursed<br />

Co-paym<strong>en</strong>t<br />

for reimbursed<br />

Public exp<strong>en</strong>ditures<br />

for reimbursed


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 81<br />

Exp<strong>en</strong>diture per month (€)<br />

Figure 3.26: Exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for chronic medication per resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

800<br />

700<br />

600<br />

500<br />

400<br />

300<br />

200<br />

100<br />

0<br />

Keypo<strong>in</strong>ts<br />

Public exp<strong>en</strong>ditures<br />

for chronic<br />

reimbursed<br />

On average, a resi<strong>de</strong>nt used 8 medications, rang<strong>in</strong>g from no medication<br />

(less than 1% of resi<strong>de</strong>nts) to 22 medications. Most medication (88%) was for<br />

chronic use. Most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly used were psycholeptic and/or anti<strong>de</strong>pressant<br />

ag<strong>en</strong>ts (<strong>in</strong> 68% of resi<strong>de</strong>nts), laxatives (50%) and cardiovascular drugs (47%).<br />

Exp<strong>en</strong>ditures per resi<strong>de</strong>nt for chronic medication amounted to a mean<br />

public exp<strong>en</strong>diture of 90 €, co-paym<strong>en</strong>t of 23 € and out-of-pocket paym<strong>en</strong>t<br />

for chronic non-reimbursed medication of 27 €.<br />

3.4.8 Assessm<strong>en</strong>t of quality of medication prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Our aim was to assess several elem<strong>en</strong>ts of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality (un<strong>de</strong>rprescrib<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

misprescrib<strong>in</strong>g, overprescrib<strong>in</strong>g) with published sets of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>in</strong>dicators,<br />

us<strong>in</strong>g a pragmatic approach. We limited ourselves to items which could be programmed<br />

on the basis of our cl<strong>in</strong>ical questionnaire and on the basis of the <strong>de</strong>scription of the<br />

medication on the medication chart.<br />

We focused on three published sets (see App<strong>en</strong>dix 10):<br />

ACOVE Criteria of un<strong>de</strong>rprescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

BEERS Criteria of <strong>in</strong>appropriate drugs<br />

BEDNURS Criteria for nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

In addition, we programmed<br />

Co-paym<strong>en</strong>t<br />

for chronic<br />

reimbursed<br />

Out-of-pocket exp<strong>en</strong>ditures<br />

for chronic<br />

non reimbursed<br />

a list of relevant and preval<strong>en</strong>t drug-drug <strong>in</strong>teractions, based on rec<strong>en</strong>t<br />

observational study<br />

a list of <strong>in</strong>appropriate medic<strong>in</strong>es as <strong>in</strong>dicated by the Belgian Drug<br />

Information C<strong>en</strong>ter<br />

i<strong>de</strong>ntification of any chronic use of b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es and analogues


82 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

3.4.8.1 ACOVE criteria<br />

A pragmatic selection of 7 criteria of un<strong>de</strong>rutilization was ma<strong>de</strong>. I<strong>de</strong>ntification of the<br />

disease (the IF statem<strong>en</strong>t) was based on the appreciation of the physician tick<strong>in</strong>g a<br />

limited list of diseases on the questionnaire. With the diagnosis of heart failure, no<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation on the v<strong>en</strong>tricular ejection fraction (<strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g the pump<strong>in</strong>g capacity of the<br />

heart) was available.<br />

I<strong>de</strong>ntification of the medic<strong>in</strong>e (the THEN statem<strong>en</strong>t) was based on the <strong>in</strong>ternational<br />

ATC-classification. No dist<strong>in</strong>ction was ma<strong>de</strong> betwe<strong>en</strong> selective and non-selective betablockers.<br />

Possible contra-<strong>in</strong>dications for the medic<strong>in</strong>es (the UNLESS statem<strong>en</strong>t) were<br />

disregar<strong>de</strong>d, as the <strong>in</strong>formation was not available or too complicated to program. With<br />

a computer program, all resi<strong>de</strong>nts were scre<strong>en</strong>ed for pot<strong>en</strong>tial cases of un<strong>de</strong>rutilization.<br />

The preval<strong>en</strong>ce of pot<strong>en</strong>tial problems is giv<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> table 3.10, together with the<br />

preval<strong>en</strong>ce of the condition <strong>in</strong> the population.<br />

Table 3.10 : Most preval<strong>en</strong>t prescrib<strong>in</strong>g problems accord<strong>in</strong>g to 7 ACOVE<br />

Criteria of un<strong>de</strong>rprescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> Belgian nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes (N=1,730).<br />

ACOVE Criteria % of pati<strong>en</strong>ts with<br />

the disease<br />

(N=1,730)<br />

% of pati<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

with un<strong>de</strong>ruse<br />

(N=1,730)<br />

Heart Failure and no beta-blocker 32 23<br />

Heart Failure and no ACE-Inhibitor 32 20<br />

Myocardial <strong>in</strong>farction and no betablocker 27 18<br />

Osteoporosis and no bisfosfanates/VitD/Calcium 26 15<br />

Myocardial <strong>in</strong>farction and no aspir<strong>in</strong>e 27 11<br />

Diabetes and no aspir<strong>in</strong>e 17 9<br />

Osteoporosis with bifosphanates or VitD but no calcium 26 8<br />

3.4.8.2 Beers criteria<br />

Substantial un<strong>de</strong>rutilization was observed with regard to cardiovascular risk <strong>in</strong> heart<br />

failure, myocardial <strong>in</strong>farction and diabetes. In a substantial number of resi<strong>de</strong>nts with<br />

osteoporosis a pot<strong>en</strong>tial for more aggressive treatm<strong>en</strong>t might be pres<strong>en</strong>t.<br />

The BEERS List consists <strong>in</strong> fact of a list of <strong>in</strong>appropriate drugs for the el<strong>de</strong>rly, a list of<br />

<strong>in</strong>appropriate drugs wh<strong>en</strong> dosed too high, and a list of disease-drug <strong>in</strong>teractions (or<br />

drugs used <strong>in</strong> contra-<strong>in</strong>dicated conditions). For this project, only the <strong>in</strong>appropriate<br />

drugs were i<strong>de</strong>ntified (regardless of their doses).<br />

The programm<strong>in</strong>g of the disease-drug <strong>in</strong>teractions was attempted but proved to be<br />

cumbersome, because the <strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>eation of some classes (e.g. antichol<strong>in</strong>ergic<br />

antihistam<strong>in</strong>cs) was unclear, because <strong>in</strong>formation was lack<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>de</strong>tails of Belgian<br />

products (e.g. medic<strong>in</strong>es with high salt cont<strong>en</strong>t), or because our questionnaire provi<strong>de</strong>d<br />

not <strong>en</strong>ough <strong>de</strong>tail (e.g. <strong>in</strong>cont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>ce <strong>in</strong> stead of a split <strong>in</strong> blad<strong>de</strong>r output dysfunction and<br />

stress <strong>in</strong>cont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>ce).<br />

In figure 3.27, the preval<strong>en</strong>ce of the use of pot<strong>en</strong>tially <strong>in</strong>appropriate drugs among<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts is giv<strong>en</strong>. Dur<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>terpretation of this list, limitations should<br />

be consi<strong>de</strong>red.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 83<br />

Figure 3.27: Preval<strong>en</strong>ce among Belgian nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts of the use of<br />

pot<strong>en</strong>tially <strong>in</strong>appropriate drugs <strong>in</strong> 2005<br />

clorazepate potassium<br />

Limitations: Digox<strong>in</strong> was scored ev<strong>en</strong> wh<strong>en</strong> the dose was reduced to .125 mg and<br />

wh<strong>en</strong> there was atrial arrhythmia / Oxibutyn and nifedip<strong>in</strong>e were not restricted to short<br />

act<strong>in</strong>g formulations. Short act<strong>in</strong>g dipiridamole was removed from the 2002 criteria.<br />

In Belgian nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes the preval<strong>en</strong>ce of the use of pot<strong>en</strong>tially <strong>in</strong>appropriate drugs on<br />

the Beers list is rather low. Respect<strong>in</strong>g the nuances <strong>in</strong> the Beers Criteria for pot<strong>en</strong>tially<br />

<strong>in</strong>appropriate drugs would further reduce these low preval<strong>en</strong>ces.<br />

3.4.8.3 BEDNURS criteria<br />

Beers Criteria : % of resi<strong>de</strong>nts scor<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>in</strong>dividual items<br />

(N=1,730)<br />

fluoxet<strong>in</strong>e<br />

dipyridamole<br />

amitriptyl<strong>in</strong>e<br />

diazepam<br />

ergoloid mesylates<br />

nifedip<strong>in</strong>e<br />

amiodarone<br />

oxybutyn<strong>in</strong><br />

digox<strong>in</strong><br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8<br />

Although <strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d for cl<strong>in</strong>ical review of <strong>in</strong>dividual resi<strong>de</strong>nts by cl<strong>in</strong>ical pharmacists with<br />

full access to the medical record, these criteria proved to be relatively straightforward<br />

and simple to program. In this set of criteria, att<strong>en</strong>tion is giv<strong>en</strong> to the use of<br />

psychotropic medication, to NSAIDs, to drug-drug <strong>in</strong>teractions, and to disease-drug<br />

<strong>in</strong>teractions. Comb<strong>in</strong>ations of anti<strong>de</strong>pressants with antipsychotics or b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es<br />

were observed <strong>in</strong> 25% of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts, and the use of multiple anti<strong>de</strong>pressants <strong>in</strong> 4%.<br />

12% of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts used antipsychotics. Comb<strong>in</strong>ations of medic<strong>in</strong>es with a risk of<br />

hyperkalemia were the third most preval<strong>en</strong>t problem. Inappropriate comb<strong>in</strong>ations of<br />

NSAIDs with a number of other medic<strong>in</strong>es were observed, as well as a high overall use<br />

of chronic NSAID. Five differ<strong>en</strong>t long-act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es with a preval<strong>en</strong>ce of more<br />

than 2% were <strong>de</strong>tected (see figure 3.28).


84 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Figure 3.28: Most preval<strong>en</strong>t prescrib<strong>in</strong>g problems accord<strong>in</strong>g to the<br />

BEDNURS criteria <strong>in</strong> Belgian nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes <strong>in</strong> 2005<br />

Bednurse Criteria: Preval<strong>en</strong>ce of pati<strong>en</strong>ts scor<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>in</strong>divual items (N=1730)<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation Iron and NSAID<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation antihypert<strong>en</strong>sives and NSAIDS<br />

Heart failure and verapamil<br />

Long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zo: flunitrazepam<br />

Long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zo: nitrazepam<br />

Inappropriate: p<strong>en</strong>tazoc<strong>in</strong>e<br />

Long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zo: clorazepate<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation diuretics and NSAIDS<br />

Long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zo: clobazam<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation Psychotropics: N05+N05<br />

Chronic NSAID<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation Iron and antithrombotics<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation ACE and Potassium or potassium sav<strong>in</strong>g diuretic<br />

Chronic use of antipsychotics (all pati<strong>en</strong>ts)<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation Psychotropics: N05+N06<br />

Limitations: Antipsychotic use was scored without exclud<strong>in</strong>g chronically psychotic<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts / monotherapy of heart failure with diuretics was disregar<strong>de</strong>d because of<br />

programm<strong>in</strong>g error.<br />

3.4.8.4 Other criteria to assess prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0<br />

Our attempt to address problems of drug-drug <strong>in</strong>teractions by programm<strong>in</strong>g a list of<br />

relevant and preval<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>teractions based on a European observational study yiel<strong>de</strong>d<br />

little additional <strong>in</strong>formation for the <strong>de</strong>tection of pot<strong>en</strong>tial problems The same held true<br />

for the programm<strong>in</strong>g of a Belgian list of non-recomm<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d medic<strong>in</strong>es. F<strong>in</strong>ally, we flagged<br />

the chronic use of any b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>e or analogue, whether it was used as a hypnotic<br />

or an anxiolytic, or as an antiepileptic.<br />

3.4.8.5 The prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality problem score used <strong>in</strong> this study<br />

For each resi<strong>de</strong>nt, we run computer programs to flag pot<strong>en</strong>tial problems accord<strong>in</strong>g to<br />

the three published sets of quality <strong>in</strong>dicators and the three other approaches <strong>de</strong>scribed<br />

above. All flags for one resi<strong>de</strong>nt were ad<strong>de</strong>d to a sum-score. The purpose of this sumscore<br />

was its use <strong>in</strong> an explorative analysis of the explanatory power of <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

characteristics with regard to the variability <strong>in</strong> the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g with<strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutions. The purpose of this sum-score is not to make a reliable estimation of the<br />

<strong>in</strong>dividual level of quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the differ<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>stitutions.<br />

We ma<strong>de</strong> this sum-score because each set of quality criteria measured differ<strong>en</strong>t aspects<br />

of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality rang<strong>in</strong>g from un<strong>de</strong>r- and overprescrib<strong>in</strong>g to misprescrib<strong>in</strong>g. There<br />

was however some <strong>de</strong>gree of overlap <strong>in</strong> the items of the differ<strong>en</strong>t sets of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

quality <strong>in</strong>dicators with regard to psychotropic drug use, some drug-drug <strong>in</strong>teractions<br />

and some disease-drug <strong>in</strong>teractions. The overall relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> each set of quality<br />

criteria was limited and showed the highest correlation betwe<strong>en</strong> the score for drugdrug<br />

<strong>in</strong>teractions and BEERS criteria (rs=.334) and betwe<strong>en</strong> the chronic use of<br />

b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>e and BEDNURS (rs=.304). All other correlation coeffici<strong>en</strong>ts were low<br />

(rs


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 85<br />

Quality Quality problem problem score score per per resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

8<br />

7<br />

6<br />

5<br />

4<br />

3<br />

2<br />

1<br />

0<br />

for obsolete drugs (8%). 27% of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts had a flag on the set of BEERS criteria;<br />

65% on the BEDNURS criteria and 58% on the ACOVE criteria.<br />

Figure 3.29 Number of flags per resi<strong>de</strong>nt on the differ<strong>en</strong>t sets of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

quality <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />

ACOVE BEDNURS BEERS DrugDrug B<strong>en</strong>zo<br />

58% 65% 27% 5% 51%<br />

% of resi<strong>de</strong>nts with quality problem score<br />

In figure 3.30 the result of summ<strong>in</strong>g up all flags per resi<strong>de</strong>nt is shown. The median (P25-<br />

P75) is 2 (1-4) with a range from 0 to 13.


86 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

14<br />

12<br />

10<br />

8<br />

6<br />

4<br />

2<br />

0<br />

Fig 3.30: Number of flags per resi<strong>de</strong>nt on the overall Prescrib<strong>in</strong>g Quality<br />

Problem Score<br />

Prescrib<strong>in</strong>g Quality Problem Score<br />

There was consi<strong>de</strong>rable variation with<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions of this sum-score where the median<br />

number of flags per resi<strong>de</strong>nt per <strong>in</strong>stitution ranged from a median of 1 to a median of<br />

5 flags per resi<strong>de</strong>nt betwe<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions. The Spearman rank correlation betwe<strong>en</strong> this<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality problem score and the number of diseases per resi<strong>de</strong>nt ticked by the<br />

physician on the cl<strong>in</strong>ical questionnaire was .429 (p < .01).<br />

F<strong>in</strong>ally, we exam<strong>in</strong>ed the preval<strong>en</strong>ce of use of a number of active substances which were<br />

discussed <strong>in</strong> the study of the national aggregated data. The preval<strong>en</strong>ce of usage of<br />

molsidom<strong>in</strong>e was 10%, acetylcyste<strong>in</strong>e 8%, anti-chol<strong>in</strong>ergic anti-Alzheimer medications<br />

5%, clopidogrel 5%, cetiriz<strong>in</strong>e 4%, antichol<strong>in</strong>ergic spasmolytica 4%, betahist<strong>in</strong>e (a<br />

medication marketed for vertigo) 3%, other anti-Alzheimer medications 0.2%, and<br />

piroxicam (a long-act<strong>in</strong>g NSAID) 0.1%.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 87<br />

Keypo<strong>in</strong>ts<br />

Un<strong>de</strong>r-utilization was ma<strong>in</strong>ly observed for medication that reduces<br />

cardiovascular risk.<br />

Anti<strong>de</strong>pressants were comb<strong>in</strong>ed with b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es or antipsychotics <strong>in</strong><br />

1/4 of cases. Some comb<strong>in</strong>ations with a high risk for hyperkalemia and<br />

several <strong>in</strong>appropriate comb<strong>in</strong>ations with NSAIDs were prescribed.<br />

Only few resi<strong>de</strong>nts received a comb<strong>in</strong>ation that could lead to dangerous<br />

drug-drug <strong>in</strong>teractions.<br />

The median number of quality problems was 2 per resi<strong>de</strong>nt, rang<strong>in</strong>g from 0<br />

to 13. There was a consi<strong>de</strong>rable variation betwe<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions with a<br />

median rang<strong>in</strong>g from 1 to 5.<br />

3.4.9 Relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>nts characteristics and parameters of<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

3.4.9.1 Age and g<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r<br />

3.4.9.2 Katz Scale<br />

There was no l<strong>in</strong>ear relation betwe<strong>en</strong> age and medication use (r=-.037, p=.062). As<br />

shown <strong>in</strong> figure 3.31, the number of chronic medication <strong>in</strong>creased to a mean of 8.4 <strong>in</strong><br />

the age category 70-79 and <strong>de</strong>creased to a mean of 6.6 <strong>in</strong> the age category of 100 plus.<br />

No differ<strong>en</strong>ce could be observed <strong>in</strong> the number of chronic medication and the total<br />

exp<strong>en</strong>diture for chronic medication betwe<strong>en</strong> males and females. However, the total<br />

quality problem score differed accord<strong>in</strong>g to g<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r with a higher mean score for<br />

females compared to males of 3.1 (SD 3.3) and 2.7 (SD 3.0), respectively (p


88 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

problem score followed the same tr<strong>en</strong>d. A l<strong>in</strong>ear <strong>de</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> chronic medication use<br />

was observed with <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g <strong>de</strong>gree of <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia (p


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 89<br />

3.4.9.3 Cl<strong>in</strong>ical problems<br />

A high positive l<strong>in</strong>ear correlation could be observed betwe<strong>en</strong> the number of<br />

pathological problems and the number of chronic medications used (r=.535, p < .001)<br />

(figure 3.34), total exp<strong>en</strong>ditures (r=.313) and the total quality problem score (r=.409).<br />

Albeit less pronounced, the same significant positive correlations could be observed<br />

betwe<strong>en</strong> on the one hand the number of care problems and on the other hand chronic<br />

medication (r=.326), total exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for chronic medication (r=.176) and the total<br />

quality problem score (r =.331) (all p < .001).<br />

Figure 3.34: Relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> polypathology and chronic medication<br />

number of chronic medication<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

n = 1730<br />

r = .535<br />

p < .001<br />

0 2 4 6 8 10 12<br />

number of pathological problems<br />

The cl<strong>in</strong>ical diagnosis of <strong>de</strong>pression resulted <strong>in</strong> an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the consumption of<br />

chronic medication from a mean of 6.3 (SD 3.2) to a mean of 8.6 (SD 3.3) (p


90 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

3.4.9.4 Adm<strong>in</strong>istrative characteristics of resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

The WIGW/VIPO statute of a resi<strong>de</strong>nt did not <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ce the amount of chronic<br />

medication used, the total exp<strong>en</strong>diture or the total quality problem score. Only the copaym<strong>en</strong>t<br />

for chronic medication <strong>de</strong>creased with one third <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>nts with a<br />

WIGW/VIPO statute. At resi<strong>de</strong>nts level, also OCMW/CPAS <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy had no<br />

<strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ce on consumption, exp<strong>en</strong>diture or quality.<br />

3.4.10 Univariate relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics and<br />

parameters of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality at resi<strong>de</strong>nt level<br />

3.4.10.1 Type of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

Large OCMW/CPAS nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes showed a significant lower consumption of chronic<br />

medication with a lower co-paym<strong>en</strong>t for this medication and a higher amount of cheap<br />

drugs (table 3.11 and figure 3.36).<br />

Table 3.11: Parameters of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality accord<strong>in</strong>g to type of nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home<br />

OCMW small OCMW large Private small Private large p-value of<br />

n = 548 n = 562 n = 638 n = 762 differ<strong>en</strong>ce<br />

mean (SD) mean (SD) mean (SD) mean (SD)<br />

number of drugs 8,6 (3,9) 7,8 (3,9) 7,9 (3,7) 8,1 (3,7) 0,002<br />

number of chronic systemic drugs 7,4 (3,5) 6,8 (3,4) 7,1 (3,5) 7,2 (3,3) 0,059<br />

public exp<strong>en</strong>diture for chronic reimbursed drugs 97 (128) 86 (102) 90 (114) 93 (121) 0,0780<br />

co-paym<strong>en</strong>t for chronic reimbursed drugs 24 (17) 21 (16) 24 (17) 24 (17) 0,004<br />

out of pocket exp. chronic non-reimbursed drugs 26 (25) 30 (41) 26 (27) 28 (29) 0,172<br />

perc<strong>en</strong>tage of cheap drugs 28% 32% 30% 26% 0,036<br />

n = 401 n = 379 n = 463 n = 487<br />

quality problem score 3,6 (2,4) 3,3 (2,3) 3,3 (2,3) 3,4 (2,3) 0,354<br />

In large public nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes less prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality problems were noted (ANOVA<br />

p=0.001).<br />

Figure 3.36 : Quality problem score accord<strong>in</strong>g to type of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

Prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality score<br />

14<br />

12<br />

10<br />

8<br />

6<br />

4<br />

2<br />

0<br />

small<br />

public<br />

large<br />

public<br />

small<br />

private<br />

P=0.001<br />

large<br />

private


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 91<br />

3.4.10.2 Prov<strong>in</strong>ce<br />

A comparison of the parameters of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality betwe<strong>en</strong> the 3 prov<strong>in</strong>ces<br />

<strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> the PHEBE project, revealed a significantly higher co-paym<strong>en</strong>t and a higher<br />

out-of-pocket exp<strong>en</strong>diture <strong>in</strong> the prov<strong>in</strong>ce of Ha<strong>in</strong>aut while the perc<strong>en</strong>tage of cheap<br />

medication was lower (table 3.12 and figure 3.37).<br />

Table 3.12: Parameters of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality accord<strong>in</strong>g to prov<strong>in</strong>ce<br />

Total Antwerp<strong>en</strong> Oost-Vlaan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> Ha<strong>in</strong>aut p-value of<br />

n = 2510 n = 946 n = 841 n = 723 differ<strong>en</strong>ce<br />

mean (SD) mean (SD) mean (SD) mean (SD)<br />

number of drugs 8.1 (3.8 ) 8,1 (3.9) 8.1 (3.7) 8.1 (3.8) 0,804<br />

number of chronic systemic drugs 7.1 (3.4) 7.2 (3.6) 7,0 (3.2) 7.1 (3.3) 0,760<br />

public exp<strong>en</strong>diture for chronic reimbursed drugs 90 (115) 91 (119) 90 (117) 87 (107) 0,777<br />

co-paym<strong>en</strong>t for chronic reimbursed drugs 23 (17) 23 (17) 22 (16) 25 (17) 0,005<br />

out of pocket exp. chronic non-reimbursed drugs 27 (30) 27 (29) 25 (32) 31 (31)


92 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

The perc<strong>en</strong>tage of nurses with a bachelor <strong>de</strong>gree (<strong>in</strong> FTE) did not differ significantly<br />

betwe<strong>en</strong> strata. The <strong>de</strong>livery of medication by a hospital pharmacist could only be<br />

observed <strong>in</strong> OCMW/CPAS nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.<br />

Price competition for medication <strong>de</strong>livery differed consi<strong>de</strong>rably betwe<strong>en</strong> differ<strong>en</strong>t types<br />

of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes rang<strong>in</strong>g from 100% of large OCMW/CPAS homes to only 37% of small<br />

private homes hav<strong>in</strong>g competition (figure 3.38). In all private homes, resi<strong>de</strong>nts received<br />

a separate bill for their medication. In OCMW/CPAS homes, this was the practice <strong>in</strong><br />

65% <strong>in</strong> the large and 80% of the small homes.<br />

Figure 3.38: Price competition for the <strong>de</strong>livery of medication<br />

% of <strong>in</strong>stitutions with price competition<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

OCMW<br />

large<br />

OCMW<br />

small<br />

Private<br />

large<br />

The practice of hav<strong>in</strong>g a large amount of pati<strong>en</strong>ts treated by the CRA differed betwe<strong>en</strong><br />

prov<strong>in</strong>ces with a mean of 40% of pati<strong>en</strong>ts treated by the CRA <strong>in</strong> Antwerp<strong>en</strong>, 18% <strong>in</strong><br />

Ha<strong>in</strong>aut and 11% <strong>in</strong> Oost-Vlaan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>. Nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff ratios were comparable <strong>in</strong> both<br />

Flemish prov<strong>in</strong>ces with on the average one staff member per 8.1 resi<strong>de</strong>nts. In Ha<strong>in</strong>aut,<br />

one staff member had to take care about a mean of 10.9 resi<strong>de</strong>nts.<br />

Hospital pharmacists were only active <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes of Antwerp<strong>en</strong>. Price<br />

competition was used <strong>in</strong> 85% of the homes <strong>in</strong> Antwerp<strong>en</strong> compared to half of the<br />

homes <strong>in</strong> Oost-Vlaan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> and Ha<strong>in</strong>aut.<br />

3.4.11.2 Case mix as part of the <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics<br />

Private<br />

small<br />

To <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>e the case-mix of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts, resi<strong>de</strong>nts characteristics (age, g<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r,<br />

OCMW/CPAS <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy) as well as cl<strong>in</strong>ical parameters (pathology problems, care<br />

problems and <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia) were tak<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>to account.<br />

Case-mix of resi<strong>de</strong>nts did not significantly differ betwe<strong>en</strong> the differ<strong>en</strong>t types of nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to prov<strong>in</strong>ce of localization, significant differ<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> case-mix could<br />

be observed for mean age of resi<strong>de</strong>nts (ol<strong>de</strong>r <strong>in</strong> Ha<strong>in</strong>aut), mean perc<strong>en</strong>tage of<br />

OCMW/CPAS <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy (higher <strong>in</strong> Antwerp<strong>en</strong>), mean perc<strong>en</strong>tage <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia (highest<br />

<strong>in</strong> Antwerp<strong>en</strong>) and mean number of care problems (highest <strong>in</strong> Ha<strong>in</strong>aut).<br />

3.4.11.3 Relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics and the quality of the medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t system<br />

Some of the structural aspects of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes had a substantial <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ce on the<br />

quality of the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t system. A positive relationship could be observed


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 93<br />

with the pres<strong>en</strong>ce of a hospital pharmacist and a better nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff<strong>in</strong>g (less resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

per staff member, more bachelors). A negative relationship was observed with the<br />

location <strong>in</strong> the prov<strong>in</strong>ce of Ha<strong>in</strong>aut and with the practice of offer<strong>in</strong>g a separate bill for<br />

medication. Only the quality score for self medication forms an exception to these<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eral tr<strong>en</strong>ds. Here we noticed a positive relationship with location <strong>in</strong> Ha<strong>in</strong>aut, a high<br />

number of resi<strong>de</strong>nts and a high number of resi<strong>de</strong>nts treated by one nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff<br />

member.<br />

Cl<strong>in</strong>ical aspects of the case-mix did not show any significant relationship with the quality<br />

of the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t system <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. In contrast, higher<br />

perc<strong>en</strong>tage of females, ol<strong>de</strong>r mean age and higher perc<strong>en</strong>tage of OCMW/CPAS<br />

<strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt resi<strong>de</strong>nts had a positive <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ce on the total quality score as well as some<br />

of the partial scores (table 3.13)<br />

Table 3.13: Relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics and the quality<br />

of the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t system<br />

Total quality score<br />

Partial scores<br />

Procedures Formulary Preparation Self medication<br />

Institutional characteristics<br />

Structural<br />

OCMW nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

rs rs rs rs rs<br />

Location <strong>in</strong> Ha<strong>in</strong>aut -0,243 -0,393 -0,195 -0,198 0,284<br />

Total number of beds -0,236<br />

Number of resi<strong>de</strong>ntsat the ward<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage treated by CRA<br />

0,313<br />

Hospital pharmacist<br />

Price concurr<strong>en</strong>ce<br />

0,291 0,366 -0,192<br />

Separate bill for medication -0,241 -0,319<br />

Ratio resi<strong>de</strong>nts per nurse -0,262 -0,229 -0,323 0,205<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage Bachelors<br />

Case Mix<br />

0,242 -0,230<br />

Mean birth year -0,251<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage female 0,299 0,255 0,190<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage OCMW <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt<br />

Mean number of pathological problems<br />

Mean number of care problems<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia<br />

0,237 0,223 0,251<br />

3.4.11.4 Relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics and the parameters of<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

As shown <strong>in</strong> table 3.14 structural parameters as well as case-mix were clearly related to<br />

the differ<strong>en</strong>t aspects of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality. The pres<strong>en</strong>ce of a hospital pharmacist and<br />

price competition had a positive <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ce on exp<strong>en</strong>diture for medication. Quality<br />

problems <strong>de</strong>creased with high activity of the CRA and the pres<strong>en</strong>ce of a hospital<br />

pharmacist, with higher perc<strong>en</strong>tage of OCMW/CPAS <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt resi<strong>de</strong>nts and<br />

<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia. Quality problems <strong>in</strong>creased with higher perc<strong>en</strong>tage of females and higher<br />

mean number of pathological and care problems.<br />

Type and size of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home and ward, staff ratio and mean age of resi<strong>de</strong>nts did not<br />

show any relationship with the parameters of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality.


94 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Table 3.14: Relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics and the<br />

parameters of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

n of chronic<br />

medication<br />

public exp<br />

reimbursed<br />

co-paym<strong>en</strong>t<br />

reimbursed<br />

perc<strong>en</strong>tage<br />

cheap<br />

quality<br />

problems<br />

Institutional characteristics rs rs rs rs rs<br />

Structural<br />

OCMW nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

Location <strong>in</strong> Antwerp<strong>en</strong> 0,317 -0,384<br />

Location <strong>in</strong> Ha<strong>in</strong>aut 0,267 -0,299<br />

Total number of beds<br />

Number of resi<strong>de</strong>ntsat the ward<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage treated by CRA 0,211 -0,265<br />

Hospital pharmacist -0,244 0,372 -0,213<br />

Price concurr<strong>en</strong>ce -0,218 -0,290 0,267<br />

Separate bill for medication -0,410 -0,288<br />

Ratio resi<strong>de</strong>nts per nurse<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage Bachelors<br />

Case Mix<br />

Mean birth year<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage female 0,195<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage OCMW <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt -0,197 0,285 -0,239<br />

Mean number of pathological problems 0,509 0,356 0,428 -0,192 0,560<br />

Mean number of care problems 0,250 0,210 -0,355 0,416<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia -0,385<br />

3.4.11.5 Relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> the quality scores of the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t system<br />

and the parameters of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

Univariate analysis of the relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> the quality of medication managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

systems <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality only <strong>de</strong>livered a limited number of<br />

significant results. A better score on the use of a formulary resulted <strong>in</strong> an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong><br />

the perc<strong>en</strong>tage of cheap medication (table 3.15).<br />

Table 3.15: Relationship betwe<strong>en</strong> the quality of the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

system and parameters of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

n of chronic<br />

medication<br />

public exp<br />

reimbursed<br />

co-paym<strong>en</strong>t<br />

reimbursed<br />

perc<strong>en</strong>tage<br />

cheap<br />

quality<br />

problems<br />

Quality scores of medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t system<br />

Level of the ward<br />

Work procedures<br />

rs rs rs rs rs<br />

Formulary<br />

Communication<br />

0,392<br />

Medication record<br />

Storage of medication<br />

Self medication<br />

Preparation<br />

Adm<strong>in</strong>istration<br />

Information<br />

-0,207<br />

Total score at ward level 0,225<br />

Level of the <strong>in</strong>stitution<br />

Medication managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

Formulary 0,358<br />

Activities of pharmacist -0,309<br />

Total score at <strong>in</strong>stitutional level -0,217


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 95<br />

3.4.12 Multivariate analysis<br />

This analysis was performed at the level of the <strong>in</strong>stitution and compared <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

characteristics (see method for the full list of the variables) and the exog<strong>en</strong>ous variables<br />

of appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g (see methods for operationalization).<br />

The iterative omission of <strong>in</strong>significant variables procedure (cfr. supra for a <strong>de</strong>scription)<br />

resulted <strong>in</strong> a F<strong>in</strong>al mo<strong>de</strong>l . Detailed regression results of the f<strong>in</strong>al mo<strong>de</strong>ls <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d<br />

estimated coeffici<strong>en</strong>ts, their standard errors, t-statistics and p-values. Highly significant<br />

variables (p-values < 0.05) are pr<strong>in</strong>ted <strong>in</strong> bold (see App<strong>en</strong>dix 11 and 12). All mo<strong>de</strong>ls<br />

expla<strong>in</strong> betwe<strong>en</strong> 53% and 78% of the variation of the outcome variables.<br />

The average number of medication was ma<strong>in</strong>ly <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ced by the <strong>de</strong>gree of polypathology<br />

and the number of care problems of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts. The average number of<br />

medication <strong>de</strong>creased with a more favorable resi<strong>de</strong>nt/nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff ratio. Focus<strong>in</strong>g on<br />

the average number of chronic systemic medication per resi<strong>de</strong>nt, the same problem<br />

scores and staff<strong>in</strong>g variables showed to have a significant effect. For chronic systemic<br />

medication, also the perc<strong>en</strong>tage of RVT beds <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home was positively related<br />

to the number of chronic systemic medication.<br />

The variation <strong>in</strong> public exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for chronic medication was ma<strong>in</strong>ly <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ced by<br />

the number of care problems, the perc<strong>en</strong>tage of resi<strong>de</strong>nts with OCMW/CPAS<br />

<strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy, the resi<strong>de</strong>nt/nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff ratio, the size of the <strong>in</strong>stitution and the number<br />

of resi<strong>de</strong>nts treated by the CRA. The average amount of co-paym<strong>en</strong>t was ma<strong>in</strong>ly<br />

<strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ced by the perc<strong>en</strong>tage of wom<strong>en</strong>, the perc<strong>en</strong>tage of OCMW/CPAS <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy,<br />

the poly-pathology of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts and the size of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home. The perc<strong>en</strong>tage<br />

of cheap medication prescribed was negatively <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ced by the monopoly position of<br />

the pharmacist. In contrast, price competition had a positive <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ce on the amount of<br />

<strong>in</strong>exp<strong>en</strong>sive medication used.<br />

The total score of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality problems <strong>in</strong>creased with higher poly-pathology<br />

and <strong>in</strong> larger <strong>in</strong>stitutions. The problem score <strong>de</strong>creased with a higher number of<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts treated by the CRA, a larger number of activities performed by the<br />

pharmacist, a higher mean age of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts and a higher perc<strong>en</strong>tage of <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia.<br />

Additional multivariate analysis with various aspects of the quality of the medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t system as <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt variables revealed that particularly the ext<strong>en</strong>t and the<br />

qualification of the staff played a role <strong>in</strong> expla<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g the variation among nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

(see App<strong>en</strong>dix 12).<br />

In summary, focus<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics (and after correct<strong>in</strong>g for case-mix)<br />

it is clear that resi<strong>de</strong>nt/nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff ratios contribute substantially <strong>in</strong> expla<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

differ<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> outcome variables.<br />

Other <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics (size, supply of drugs, medication managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

scores) seem to be of relative m<strong>in</strong>or importance <strong>in</strong> expla<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g differ<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> the<br />

outcome variables: these characteristics were estimated significantly <strong>in</strong> maximum 2 of<br />

the 7 mo<strong>de</strong>ls.


96 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Keypo<strong>in</strong>ts for 3.4.9 to 3.4.12<br />

Poly-pathology and a high number of care problems <strong>in</strong>creased the number<br />

of prescribed medications as well as the number of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

problems.<br />

Large OCMW/CPAS nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes showed a significant lower<br />

consumption of chronic medication with a lower co-paym<strong>en</strong>t for this<br />

medication and a higher amount of cheap drugs.<br />

A significantly higher co-paym<strong>en</strong>t and a higher out-of-pocket exp<strong>en</strong>diture <strong>in</strong><br />

the prov<strong>in</strong>ce of Ha<strong>in</strong>aut were observed while the perc<strong>en</strong>tage of cheap<br />

medication was lower.<br />

The pres<strong>en</strong>ce of a hospital pharmacist and price competition showed a<br />

positive relation with exp<strong>en</strong>diture for medication.<br />

Quality problems <strong>de</strong>creased with high activity of the CRA and the pres<strong>en</strong>ce<br />

of a hospital pharmacist, with higher perc<strong>en</strong>tage of OCMW/CPAS<br />

<strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt resi<strong>de</strong>nts and <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia. Quality problems <strong>in</strong>creased with higher<br />

perc<strong>en</strong>tage of females and higher mean number of pathological and care<br />

problems. Staff<strong>in</strong>g played a role <strong>in</strong> the variation among nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 97<br />

4 DISCUSSION AND GENERAL<br />

CONCLUSIONS<br />

Authors: Robert Van<strong>de</strong>r Stichele, Dirk Ramaekers, Car<strong>in</strong>e Van <strong>de</strong> Voor<strong>de</strong>,<br />

Monique Elseviers, Mirko Petrovic<br />

4.1 STRENGHTS OF THE STUDY<br />

In this report, for the first time, national aggregated data on medication use and<br />

exp<strong>en</strong>ditures of reimbursed medic<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong> rest- and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes <strong>in</strong> Belgium are<br />

<strong>de</strong>scribed, mak<strong>in</strong>g it possible to assess the impact of this segm<strong>en</strong>t on the total health<br />

care budget. In the field study, a large repres<strong>en</strong>tative sample of Belgian resi<strong>de</strong>nts,<br />

stemm<strong>in</strong>g from a consi<strong>de</strong>rable number of <strong>in</strong>stitutions of 3 of the 10 prov<strong>in</strong>ces of the<br />

country, is <strong>in</strong>vestigated. Detailed <strong>in</strong>formation on the cl<strong>in</strong>ical and functional status of the<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts was collected and a thorough analysis of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality was performed,<br />

us<strong>in</strong>g a range of <strong>in</strong>ternationally accepted sets of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>in</strong>dicators, suitable<br />

for electronic evaluation. The close collaboration with the managem<strong>en</strong>t of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes and with the coord<strong>in</strong>ation physicians guaranteed the high response rate of the<br />

treat<strong>in</strong>g physicians, result<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> high quality and high cl<strong>in</strong>ical cont<strong>en</strong>t of the data.<br />

In the collaborat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions the medication managem<strong>en</strong>t system was evaluated <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>de</strong>tail with an ext<strong>en</strong>sive questionnaire and a newly <strong>de</strong>veloped scor<strong>in</strong>g system. Because<br />

we comb<strong>in</strong>ed an ext<strong>en</strong>sive data collection of <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics with a<br />

thorough assessm<strong>en</strong>t of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality, we were able to study the relationship<br />

betwe<strong>en</strong> both <strong>in</strong> univariate and multivariate analysis, at the level of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts and at<br />

the level of the <strong>in</strong>stitutions.<br />

4.2 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY<br />

Drug utilization data based on aggregated national data are only cru<strong>de</strong> consumption<br />

measures, sometimes difficult to <strong>in</strong>terpret without cl<strong>in</strong>ical <strong>in</strong>formation. There is some<br />

imprecision <strong>in</strong> the consumption data from the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes served by hospital<br />

pharmacists, because of practical problems with <strong>in</strong>voice data. Pru<strong>de</strong>nt <strong>in</strong>terpretation of<br />

geographical variation of these aggregated data is warranted, because of the problem of<br />

ecological fallacy.<br />

Data collection of medication usage <strong>in</strong> the field study was based on the medication<br />

charts as recor<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g record. Detection bias is possible and more likely for<br />

if nee<strong>de</strong>d or acute medication. We did not attempt to collect exp<strong>en</strong>diture data on the<br />

if nee<strong>de</strong>d medication because it was not possible to record their actual consumption<br />

<strong>in</strong> a cross-sectional study. The calculations of exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for acute medications were<br />

based on a cru<strong>de</strong> estimation of duration of therapy. Volume was calculated with the<br />

Def<strong>in</strong>ed Daily Dose, which is based on the standard dose for the ma<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>dication of the<br />

drug <strong>in</strong> adults. Recomm<strong>en</strong>dations for dose reductions <strong>in</strong> frail el<strong>de</strong>rly were not tak<strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>to account <strong>in</strong> these calculations and must be consi<strong>de</strong>red <strong>in</strong> the evaluation of the<br />

consumption of <strong>in</strong>dividual drugs.<br />

For the construction of disease-ori<strong>en</strong>ted quality <strong>in</strong>dicators, data were collected on the<br />

cl<strong>in</strong>ical diagnoses and care problems of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts, based on the assessm<strong>en</strong>t of the<br />

treat<strong>in</strong>g physician, respond<strong>in</strong>g to a non-validated questionnaire. This is but an<br />

approximation of the full risk profile and co-morbidity of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts.<br />

We applied automated scor<strong>in</strong>g algorithms for flagg<strong>in</strong>g pot<strong>en</strong>tial prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality<br />

problems, based on sets of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>in</strong>dicators, orig<strong>in</strong>ally <strong>de</strong>signed for labour<strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong>sive,<br />

<strong>in</strong>dividual assessm<strong>en</strong>t of resi<strong>de</strong>nts by cl<strong>in</strong>ical pharmacists, hav<strong>in</strong>g access to the<br />

full medical record. Individual chart review by cl<strong>in</strong>ical pharmacists allows for more<br />

accurate establishm<strong>en</strong>t of diagnoses, and specification of cl<strong>in</strong>ically acceptable exceptions<br />

to g<strong>en</strong>eral rules of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g. These limitations may lead to a limited <strong>de</strong>gree of false<br />

positive <strong>de</strong>tections of quality problems. On the other hand, it was not possible to<br />

program all elem<strong>en</strong>ts of the Beers Criteria, lead<strong>in</strong>g to un<strong>de</strong>r<strong>de</strong>tection of problems. This<br />

hampers the use of these data for <strong>in</strong>ternational comparisons. We ma<strong>de</strong> a cru<strong>de</strong> sum-


98 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

score of the flags <strong>de</strong>tected by the differ<strong>en</strong>t sets of quality <strong>in</strong>dicators, because each set of<br />

quality criteria measures differ<strong>en</strong>t aspects (misprescrib<strong>in</strong>g, un<strong>de</strong>rprescrib<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

overprescrib<strong>in</strong>g). However, there is a limited overlap betwe<strong>en</strong> the differ<strong>en</strong>t sets, and no<br />

attempt to correct for this overlap was ma<strong>de</strong>.<br />

Our analysis of the complex relation of <strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics with prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

quality was hampered by the lack of <strong>in</strong>formation on an obvious <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>ant, namely the<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g physician, and by the lack of <strong>in</strong>formation on true outcome variables such as<br />

mortality, hospitalization admission rates and quality of life. This was a cross-sectional<br />

study, with a s<strong>in</strong>gle observation <strong>in</strong> time. Longitud<strong>in</strong>al research would give more <strong>in</strong>sight<br />

<strong>in</strong> the dynamics of the functional status, medical condition and medication usage of<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts.<br />

We were able to conduct a multivariate analysis of the relationship betwe<strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutional characteristics and prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality. However, study<strong>in</strong>g multiple mo<strong>de</strong>ls<br />

for several <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt variables may <strong>in</strong>crease the chance of erroneously f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g<br />

significant results. In addition, consi<strong>de</strong>rable coll<strong>in</strong>earity betwe<strong>en</strong> the <strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt<br />

variables <strong>in</strong>creases the difficulty of a correct <strong>in</strong>terpretation of the results. The weight of<br />

dummy variables (e.g. private <strong>in</strong>stitution or not) may distort results, especially wh<strong>en</strong> the<br />

differ<strong>en</strong>ce betwe<strong>en</strong> for profit and non-for profit private <strong>in</strong>stitution is ignored or biased.<br />

Therefore, we performed a full and systematic univariate analysis first and ma<strong>de</strong> pru<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

conclusions on possible relationships, only based on correlations confirmed <strong>in</strong> both<br />

univariate and multivariate analysis. Because we were not able to aggregate the<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts data to the level of the ward, it was not possible to perform a multi-level,<br />

multivariate analysis.<br />

4.3 MEDICAL DISCUSSION OF THE DETECTED PRESCRIBING<br />

QUALITY PROBLEMS<br />

In both the study of the aggregated national drug utilization data and <strong>in</strong> the results of<br />

the field study a number of preval<strong>en</strong>t prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality problems were i<strong>de</strong>ntified. In the<br />

follow<strong>in</strong>g sections we will discuss the cl<strong>in</strong>ical relevance of these problems, <strong>in</strong> the light of<br />

the available evi<strong>de</strong>nce <strong>in</strong> the medical literature.<br />

4.3.1 Discussion on the national drug utilization data <strong>in</strong> rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

The scope of this research project did not permit us to perform a full systematic review<br />

or health technology assessm<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g a cost-effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess analysis for every s<strong>in</strong>gle<br />

drug. However, a rapid literature search on several of the drugs frequ<strong>en</strong>tly used <strong>in</strong><br />

Belgian rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes leads to numerous rec<strong>en</strong>t systematic reviews and some<br />

rec<strong>en</strong>t good quality cl<strong>in</strong>ical trials. The utility of certa<strong>in</strong> frequ<strong>en</strong>tly used drugs and the<br />

appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess of some prescription patterns can be questioned. S<strong>in</strong>ce we did not<br />

dispose of other variables like cl<strong>in</strong>ical pati<strong>en</strong>t characteristics per medication group it is<br />

<strong>in</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eral not warranted to <strong>in</strong>terpret the national data towards an un<strong>de</strong>r- or overuse<br />

and h<strong>en</strong>ce to appraise the drug utilization quality. However, certa<strong>in</strong> prescription<br />

patterns can be discussed for those drugs that are l<strong>in</strong>ked to one or a limited number of<br />

<strong>in</strong>dications and were the evi<strong>de</strong>nce clearly po<strong>in</strong>ts towards possible quality problems<br />

related to effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess, appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess and safety.<br />

Molsidom<strong>in</strong>e, a so called nitric oxi<strong>de</strong> donor and the number one <strong>in</strong> the group of<br />

cardiovascular drugs used <strong>in</strong> Belgian rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, is used for the treatm<strong>en</strong>t<br />

of pati<strong>en</strong>ts with stable ang<strong>in</strong>a pectoris. It is commercialized <strong>in</strong> several European<br />

countries among which Belgium. Molsidom<strong>in</strong>e features a similar pharmacological profile<br />

as the organic nitrates. With regard to pharmak<strong>in</strong>etic effects, organic nitrates and<br />

molsidom<strong>in</strong>e are similar. 161 As the onset of action of molsidom<strong>in</strong>e is comparatively slow,<br />

it is not used to treat acute cases of ang<strong>in</strong>a. Furthermore, due to its carc<strong>in</strong>og<strong>en</strong>ic effect,<br />

molsidom<strong>in</strong>e should only be consi<strong>de</strong>red wh<strong>en</strong> the treatm<strong>en</strong>t with organic nitrates is not<br />

suffici<strong>en</strong>t, for example <strong>in</strong> the nitrate-free <strong>in</strong>terval. Pharmacok<strong>in</strong>etics and metabolism of<br />

molsidom<strong>in</strong>e are impaired <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly subjects. In pati<strong>en</strong>ts with liver disease and<br />

congestive heart failure similar changes were observed. Clearance is also impaired <strong>in</strong><br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts with liver disease, but the pharmacok<strong>in</strong>etics of molsidom<strong>in</strong>e was not markedly<br />

altered by impaired r<strong>en</strong>al function. 162 The acute toxicity of molsidom<strong>in</strong>e as well as the


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 99<br />

organic nitrates are directly related to their therapeutic vasodilatation of orthostatic<br />

hypot<strong>en</strong>sion, tachycardia and throbb<strong>in</strong>g headache.<br />

The evi<strong>de</strong>nce concern<strong>in</strong>g long-term effects of molsidom<strong>in</strong>e is scarce. 163 There is no high<br />

quality evi<strong>de</strong>nce that molsidom<strong>in</strong>e compared to placebo reduces the number of ang<strong>in</strong>a<br />

pectoris attacks, nor that it <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ces long term <strong>en</strong>dpo<strong>in</strong>ts such as morbidity and<br />

mortality. Some studies showed a positive effect on a surrogate <strong>en</strong>dpo<strong>in</strong>t i.e. exercise<br />

tolerance. There is no evi<strong>de</strong>nce for the hypothesis that there is no tolerance<br />

<strong>de</strong>velopm<strong>en</strong>t with the use of molsidom<strong>in</strong>e. 164 In cl<strong>in</strong>ical practice gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es, such as the<br />

rec<strong>en</strong>tly updated gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>e of the European Society of Cardiology, molsidom<strong>in</strong>e is not<br />

m<strong>en</strong>tioned <strong>in</strong> the algorithm for the medical managem<strong>en</strong>t of stable ang<strong>in</strong>a. 165 There is<br />

only one refer<strong>en</strong>ce to a study that studied the non<strong>in</strong>feriority of molsidom<strong>in</strong>e 16 mg<br />

compared with 8 mg <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> Hongary, Poland and Belgium and that was<br />

writt<strong>en</strong> by employees of Therabel Pharma. 166<br />

S<strong>in</strong>ce no <strong>de</strong>tailed cl<strong>in</strong>ical data were available, it is impossible to appraise the<br />

antihypert<strong>en</strong>sives prescription behavior. Geographical variations <strong>in</strong> antihypert<strong>en</strong>sives<br />

show clear prefer<strong>en</strong>ces towards either more diuretics (<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g thiazi<strong>de</strong>s) or towards<br />

more second l<strong>in</strong>e treatm<strong>en</strong>ts such as amlodip<strong>in</strong>e, ACE <strong>in</strong>hibitors and angiot<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong> II<br />

antagonists (sartans). 167 The recomm<strong>en</strong>dations of the NRKP/CNPQ favor diuretics over<br />

the other abovem<strong>en</strong>tioned classes as first l<strong>in</strong>e treatm<strong>en</strong>t. However, to <strong>in</strong>terpret the<br />

differ<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> prescription behavior more epi<strong>de</strong>miological data and more longitud<strong>in</strong>al<br />

analyses of the sequ<strong>en</strong>ce on prescribed antihypert<strong>en</strong>sive ag<strong>en</strong>ts based on e.g. the data of<br />

the sickness funds are nee<strong>de</strong>d.<br />

In old age, <strong>de</strong>pressive syndromes oft<strong>en</strong> affect people with chronic medical illnesses,<br />

cognitive impairm<strong>en</strong>t or disability. The number of prescriptions of anti<strong>de</strong>pressants is<br />

huge <strong>in</strong> this el<strong>de</strong>rly population <strong>in</strong> Belgium. Without <strong>de</strong>tailed cl<strong>in</strong>ical data on the<br />

<strong>de</strong>pressive disor<strong>de</strong>rs and the diagnostic process followed, it is impossible to suggest an<br />

un<strong>de</strong>ruse or overuse of anti<strong>de</strong>pressants. The use of atypical antipsychotics is very<br />

popular <strong>in</strong> Belgian rest- and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. It is unlikely that they are oft<strong>en</strong> used for<br />

schizophr<strong>en</strong>ia <strong>in</strong> this population, so that the most frequ<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>dications are most likely<br />

behavioral and psychological symptoms of <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia (BPSD). The atypical antipsychotic<br />

drugs are be<strong>in</strong>g used with <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g frequ<strong>en</strong>cy without clear evi<strong>de</strong>nce of the nature and<br />

ext<strong>en</strong>t of the cl<strong>in</strong>ical value of antipsychotic medications. Few high quality randomised<br />

trials have evaluated their use for BPSD and there have be<strong>en</strong> concerns about adverse<br />

effects, significant risk for cerebrovascular ev<strong>en</strong>ts especially with risperidone, and<br />

<strong>in</strong>creased mortality overall. Several of these newer atypical drugs are more exp<strong>en</strong>sive<br />

than the ol<strong>de</strong>r typical antipsychotics. Limited evi<strong>de</strong>nce supports the perception of<br />

improved efficacy and adverse ev<strong>en</strong>t profiles compared with typical antipsychotic<br />

drugs. 168, 169 Rec<strong>en</strong>tly, <strong>in</strong> a governm<strong>en</strong>t sponsored effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess trial 170 , it was shown that<br />

atypical antipsychotic drugs were somewhat more effective but also more toxic than<br />

placebo <strong>in</strong> Alzheimer pati<strong>en</strong>ts. There was no differ<strong>en</strong>ce for the cl<strong>in</strong>ically highly relevant<br />

primary <strong>en</strong>dpo<strong>in</strong>t (drug discont<strong>in</strong>uation for any reason) as an <strong>in</strong>dicator of the overall<br />

success of drug therapy. Although these f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs do not <strong>in</strong>validate therapeutic trials of<br />

these drugs <strong>in</strong> appropriately selected pati<strong>en</strong>ts with Alzheimer disease, tak<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>to<br />

account the volume and the large variations <strong>in</strong> the use of these drugs, they do suggest<br />

that their appropriate use urg<strong>en</strong>tly needs further <strong>in</strong>vestigation.<br />

The use of acetylchol<strong>in</strong>esterase <strong>in</strong>hibitors for <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia, the so called anti-Alzheimer<br />

drugs, has be<strong>en</strong> largely <strong>de</strong>bated <strong>in</strong> the medical literature. 171 A Cochrane reviewer of<br />

chol<strong>in</strong>esterase <strong>in</strong>hibitor trials explored the pot<strong>en</strong>tial effects of several limitations and<br />

methodological flaws and conclu<strong>de</strong>d that the likely magnitu<strong>de</strong> of the bias does not<br />

<strong>in</strong>validate the b<strong>en</strong>eficial f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs of the studies. 172 Donepezil is the most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly used<br />

drug <strong>in</strong> this class <strong>in</strong> Belgium. People with mild, mo<strong>de</strong>rate or severe <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia due to<br />

Alzheimer's disease experi<strong>en</strong>ce b<strong>en</strong>efits <strong>in</strong> cognitive function, activities of daily liv<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

behavior. The <strong>de</strong>bate on whether donepezil is effective cont<strong>in</strong>ues <strong>de</strong>spite the evi<strong>de</strong>nce<br />

of efficacy from the cl<strong>in</strong>ical studies because the treatm<strong>en</strong>t effects are small and are not<br />

always appar<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> practice. 173 There is no evi<strong>de</strong>nce to support the use of donepezil for<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts with mild cognitive impairm<strong>en</strong>t. The putative b<strong>en</strong>efits are m<strong>in</strong>or, short lived and<br />

associated with significant si<strong>de</strong> effects. 174 The cost-effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess of these exp<strong>en</strong>sive drugs<br />

is unclear and highly <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt on assumptions surround<strong>in</strong>g cl<strong>in</strong>ical effect and local cost


100 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

data. 175 Extracts of the leaves of the mai<strong>de</strong>nhair tree, g<strong>in</strong>gko biloba, have be<strong>en</strong> used <strong>in</strong><br />

traditional Ch<strong>in</strong>ese medic<strong>in</strong>e for thousands of years for several purposes. Cl<strong>in</strong>ical trials<br />

of the effects on <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia show <strong>in</strong>consist<strong>en</strong>t results. 176 Several case reports <strong>de</strong>scribe<br />

bleed<strong>in</strong>g complications with G<strong>in</strong>kgo biloba, with or without concomitant drug<br />

therapy. 177<br />

Mucolytics are the drugs most prescribed for respiratory disease <strong>in</strong> rest- and nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes. The most dom<strong>in</strong>ant drug <strong>in</strong> this class, N-acetylcyste<strong>in</strong>e, was promoted to<br />

reduce the number of acute COPD exacerbations, supported by some systematic<br />

reviews. 178 However, there is <strong>in</strong>suffici<strong>en</strong>t evi<strong>de</strong>nce for the systematic use of<br />

acetylcyste<strong>in</strong>e 179 and a rec<strong>en</strong>t large prospective multi-c<strong>en</strong>tre study (BRONCUS),<br />

reported that acetylcyste<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong> the regular dose of 600 mg daily is <strong>in</strong>effective at<br />

prev<strong>en</strong>tion of <strong>de</strong>terioration <strong>in</strong> lung function and prev<strong>en</strong>tion of exacerbations <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

with COPD. 180<br />

The more rec<strong>en</strong>tly commercialized anti-allergic ag<strong>en</strong>t levocetiriz<strong>in</strong>e is an <strong>en</strong>antiomer of<br />

cetiriz<strong>in</strong>e, and is thus as such not a new compound, but part of an already known and<br />

cheaper preparation. Levocetiriz<strong>in</strong>e has not be<strong>en</strong> shown to have any advantage over<br />

cetiriz<strong>in</strong>e with respect to cl<strong>in</strong>ical efficacy, adverse drug reactions or cost.<br />

Clopidogrel, related to the ol<strong>de</strong>r ticlopid<strong>in</strong>e, and much more exp<strong>en</strong>sive than aspir<strong>in</strong>, is<br />

wi<strong>de</strong>ly prescribed <strong>in</strong> Belgian rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes for chronic treatm<strong>en</strong>t. In g<strong>en</strong>eral,<br />

the use of antithrombotic ag<strong>en</strong>ts has ris<strong>en</strong> dramatically over the last years. In theory, it<br />

has however only limited <strong>in</strong>dications, especially <strong>in</strong> those circumstances where aspir<strong>in</strong> is<br />

contra<strong>in</strong>dicated or not tolerated and <strong>in</strong> a limited time <strong>in</strong>terval follow<strong>in</strong>g coronary st<strong>en</strong>t<br />

implantation (e.g. 1 month follow<strong>in</strong>g bare metal st<strong>en</strong>ts and 3 to 6 months follow<strong>in</strong>g drug<br />

elut<strong>in</strong>g st<strong>en</strong>ts). It can also be consi<strong>de</strong>red dur<strong>in</strong>g the first few months follow<strong>in</strong>g an acute<br />

coronary syndrome. There is evi<strong>de</strong>nce that long-term chronic treatm<strong>en</strong>t with<br />

clopidogrel plus aspir<strong>in</strong> is not more effective than aspir<strong>in</strong> alone for reduc<strong>in</strong>g<br />

cardiovascular (CV) ev<strong>en</strong>ts. 181 On the other hand, it has be<strong>en</strong> shown that bleed<strong>in</strong>g risks<br />

with this comb<strong>in</strong>ation antiplatelet therapy, which is a matter of concern <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly, is<br />

remarkably high. 182 S<strong>in</strong>ce there is only a marg<strong>in</strong>al b<strong>en</strong>efit of clopidogrel over aspir<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong><br />

cardiovascular high risk pati<strong>en</strong>ts while the price is much higher, the cost-effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess of<br />

this approach for pati<strong>en</strong>ts where low dose aspir<strong>in</strong> is not contra<strong>in</strong>dicated should be<br />

questioned.<br />

Stat<strong>in</strong>s are wi<strong>de</strong>ly viewed as very effective and safe. Their b<strong>en</strong>efits to coronary artery<br />

disease have be<strong>en</strong> copiously docum<strong>en</strong>ted and are <strong>in</strong>controvertible. In addition, stat<strong>in</strong>s<br />

have be<strong>en</strong> shown to b<strong>en</strong>efit survival <strong>in</strong> a large study of middle-aged m<strong>en</strong> with, or at high<br />

risk for, heart disease. 183 Nonetheless, all drugs have pot<strong>en</strong>tial adverse reactions <strong>de</strong>spite<br />

their pot<strong>en</strong>tial b<strong>en</strong>efits. Un<strong>de</strong>rstand<strong>in</strong>g these risks is vitally important, particularly <strong>in</strong> frail<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> whom both risks and b<strong>en</strong>efits differ relative to younger pati<strong>en</strong>ts.<br />

Evi<strong>de</strong>nce suggests the balance of b<strong>en</strong>efits to risks may be less favourable <strong>in</strong> frail el<strong>de</strong>rly.<br />

Cholesterol becomes a less pot<strong>en</strong>t predictor of cardiovascular problems, and adverse<br />

reactions from drugs, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g stat<strong>in</strong>s, may become more prom<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>t. While pati<strong>en</strong>ts at<br />

high risk for cardiovascular disease receive mortality b<strong>en</strong>efit from stat<strong>in</strong>s <strong>in</strong> studies<br />

predom<strong>in</strong>at<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> middle-aged m<strong>en</strong> 183 no tr<strong>en</strong>d toward survival b<strong>en</strong>efit is se<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts at high risk for cardiovascular disease. 184 A less favourable risk-b<strong>en</strong>efit profile<br />

may particularly hold for pati<strong>en</strong>ts ol<strong>de</strong>r than 85, <strong>in</strong> whom b<strong>en</strong>efits may be more<br />

att<strong>en</strong>uated and risks more amplified. 185 In fact, <strong>in</strong> this ol<strong>de</strong>r group, higher cholesterol has<br />

be<strong>en</strong> l<strong>in</strong>ked observationally to improved survival. 183<br />

The rationale for v<strong>en</strong>ous thromboembolism prophylaxis is based on the cl<strong>in</strong>ically sil<strong>en</strong>t<br />

nature of the disease. In fact, most ev<strong>en</strong>ts cause few specific symptoms, and the cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

diagnosis is notoriously unreliable. Beyond the immediate complications of pulmonary<br />

embolism, which can lead to <strong>de</strong>ath, unrecognized and untreated DVT can cause longterm<br />

morbidity from chronic v<strong>en</strong>ous stasis (postphlebitic syndrome) and predispose<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts to recurr<strong>en</strong>t v<strong>en</strong>ous thromboembolism. Each <strong>in</strong>stitution should have gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es<br />

for i<strong>de</strong>ntify<strong>in</strong>g pati<strong>en</strong>ts at risk, as well as a policy for provid<strong>in</strong>g prophylactic therapy.<br />

Non-pharmacologic prophylactic measures <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> compression stock<strong>in</strong>gs, leg elevation,<br />

and early mobilization. Aspir<strong>in</strong> may be appropriate for prophylaxis of arterial<br />

thrombosis, but is not a<strong>de</strong>quate for prev<strong>en</strong>tion of v<strong>en</strong>ous thrombosis. Low-molecular-


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 101<br />

weight hepar<strong>in</strong>s (LMWHs) are used for DVT prophylaxis and <strong>in</strong> the treatm<strong>en</strong>t of DVT.<br />

LMWH are mostly giv<strong>en</strong> subcutaneously. The bleed<strong>in</strong>g risk associated with LMWH<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istration is similar to or slightly lower than the risk observed with unfractionated<br />

hepar<strong>in</strong> and is related to dose and molecular weight.<br />

El<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts who are candidates for prophylaxis <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> those with limited mobility,<br />

those with chronic conditions such as paraplegia, and those requir<strong>in</strong>g perman<strong>en</strong>t<br />

respiratory assistance. However, the true long-term risk of VTE <strong>in</strong> these pati<strong>en</strong>ts is not<br />

well known; no studies have be<strong>en</strong> performed that evaluate the b<strong>en</strong>efit of prophylaxis<br />

with an appropriate duration of treatm<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> this population.<br />

Most long-term care resi<strong>de</strong>nts with atrial fibrillation would be at high risk for embolic<br />

stroke, a disastrous complication. Additionally, they are theoretically good candidates<br />

for adjusted-dose warfar<strong>in</strong> treatm<strong>en</strong>t for atrial fibrillation. 186 They should be accessible<br />

for monitor<strong>in</strong>g and should have less dietary variability, a controlled medication list, and<br />

supervised medication adm<strong>in</strong>istration. Balanc<strong>in</strong>g these features is at least a mo<strong>de</strong>rate<br />

risk of severe bleed<strong>in</strong>g from anticoagulation based on age, co-morbidities, and<br />

polypharmacy. The <strong>de</strong>cision to start warfar<strong>in</strong> will therefore be based on the <strong>in</strong>dividual's<br />

risks and pot<strong>en</strong>tial b<strong>en</strong>efits. The optimal <strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong>sity of anticoagulation is unknown for<br />

subgroups of pati<strong>en</strong>ts with atrial fibrillation who have at least an <strong>in</strong>termediate risk of<br />

bleed<strong>in</strong>g (e.g., adults ol<strong>de</strong>r than 75 or 80 years), but there is no evi<strong>de</strong>nce that an INR<br />

lower than 2-2.5 is efficacious. Another option is to use aspir<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>stead of warfar<strong>in</strong> for<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts at high risk of bleed<strong>in</strong>g. 187-189<br />

4.3.2 Discussion of the prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality problems <strong>de</strong>tected <strong>in</strong> the field study<br />

The quality of drug utilisation will be discussed start<strong>in</strong>g from the differ<strong>en</strong>t criteria and<br />

quality systems that were applied to the data g<strong>en</strong>erated by the field study.<br />

PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED WITH THE ACOVE CRITERIA OF UNDERPRESCRIBING<br />

Heart failure and no beta-blocker<br />

Beta blockers should be consi<strong>de</strong>red standard therapy <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts with New York Heart<br />

Association class II or class III heart failure who are hemodynamically stable, who do not<br />

have dyspnea at rest and who have no other contra<strong>in</strong>dications to the use of these<br />

ag<strong>en</strong>ts. 190<br />

191, 192<br />

Heart failure and no ACE-<strong>in</strong>hibitor<br />

Overwhelm<strong>in</strong>g evi<strong>de</strong>nce accumulated dur<strong>in</strong>g almost 20 years of cl<strong>in</strong>ical experi<strong>en</strong>ce has<br />

established the b<strong>en</strong>efits of this drug, which blocks the harmful effects of angiot<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>, a<br />

substance that causes blood vessels to narrow, said the study authors. Curr<strong>en</strong>t<br />

gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es recomm<strong>en</strong>d that all pati<strong>en</strong>ts with systolic dysfunction should be gett<strong>in</strong>g ACE<br />

<strong>in</strong>hibitors, unless they have a contra<strong>in</strong>dication to the use of these drugs. Physicians<br />

might be reluctant to prescribe ACE <strong>in</strong>hibitors <strong>in</strong> certa<strong>in</strong> high-risk pati<strong>en</strong>ts, such as<br />

those with kidney disease. Some health care <strong>de</strong>livery systems might lack the necessary<br />

structure, controls or resources to <strong>en</strong>sure that heart failure pati<strong>en</strong>ts receive the best<br />

care possible. Or, some physicians possibly lack awar<strong>en</strong>ess about the pot<strong>en</strong>tial b<strong>en</strong>efits<br />

of treatm<strong>en</strong>t with ACE <strong>in</strong>hibitors.<br />

Myocardial <strong>in</strong>farction and no beta-blocker 193<br />

Although beta-adr<strong>en</strong>ergic antagonists can significantly reduce mortality after a<br />

myocardial <strong>in</strong>farction, these ag<strong>en</strong>ts are prescribed to only a small number of pati<strong>en</strong>ts.<br />

Un<strong>de</strong>rutilization of beta blockers may be attributed, <strong>in</strong> part, to fear of adverse effects,<br />

especially <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly and <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts with concomitant disor<strong>de</strong>rs such as diabetes or<br />

heart failure. However, studies have shown that such pati<strong>en</strong>ts are precisely the ones<br />

who <strong>de</strong>rive the greatest b<strong>en</strong>efit from beta blocka<strong>de</strong>. Advanc<strong>in</strong>g age or the pres<strong>en</strong>ce of<br />

pot<strong>en</strong>tially complicat<strong>in</strong>g disease states is usually not a justification for withhold<strong>in</strong>g betablocker<br />

therapy. With use of cardioselective ag<strong>en</strong>ts and through careful dos<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

monitor<strong>in</strong>g, the b<strong>en</strong>efits of beta blockers after myocardial <strong>in</strong>farction far outweigh the<br />

pot<strong>en</strong>tial risks <strong>in</strong> most pati<strong>en</strong>ts.<br />

Osteoporosis and no VitD/Calcium/ bisfosfonates 194


102 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Osteoporosis is caused by the cumulative effect of bone resorption <strong>in</strong> excess of bone<br />

formation. Multiple treatm<strong>en</strong>ts are available and more are be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>de</strong>veloped.<br />

Calcium and Vitam<strong>in</strong> D: less than one third of el<strong>de</strong>rly resi<strong>de</strong>nts take <strong>in</strong> the recomm<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d<br />

amounts of calcium and vitam<strong>in</strong> D. Pati<strong>en</strong>ts with malabsorptive problems, r<strong>en</strong>al disease<br />

or liver disease may have further problems. Calcium and Vitam<strong>in</strong> D supplem<strong>en</strong>tation<br />

have be<strong>en</strong> shown to reduce the risk of hip fracture <strong>in</strong> ol<strong>de</strong>r adults. Calcium should be<br />

giv<strong>en</strong> with meals for optimal absorption and adults should take <strong>in</strong> at least 1000 mg/day<br />

(i<strong>de</strong>ally 1500 mg/day <strong>in</strong> postm<strong>en</strong>opausal wom<strong>en</strong> or those with osteoporosis). Vitam<strong>in</strong> D<br />

(25 and 1.25 D3) can be checked, but if the serum calcium level is normal most would<br />

recomm<strong>en</strong>d empiric treatm<strong>en</strong>t with additional vitam<strong>in</strong> D of at least 400 IU. In frail ol<strong>de</strong>r<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts with limited diets and sun exposure, the required amounts are most likely<br />

much higher, at least 600-800 IU daily.<br />

Bisphosphonates: these drugs act to <strong>de</strong>crease bone resorption. Multiple studies have<br />

<strong>de</strong>monstrated a significant b<strong>en</strong>efit <strong>in</strong> the reduction of hip and vertebral fractures. It is<br />

important to remember that those at highest risk for fracture (the ol<strong>de</strong>r pati<strong>en</strong>ts and<br />

those with exist<strong>in</strong>g vertebral fractures) were the pati<strong>en</strong>ts who <strong>de</strong>rived the most b<strong>en</strong>efit<br />

from treatm<strong>en</strong>t. Contra<strong>in</strong>dications <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> r<strong>en</strong>al failure and significant oesophageal<br />

erosions/disease.<br />

Diabetes and no aspir<strong>in</strong> 195<br />

Pati<strong>en</strong>ts with type 2 diabetes mellitus have a markedly <strong>in</strong>creased risk of cardiovascular<br />

morbidity and mortality. Gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es of both the American and Canadian Diabetes<br />

Associations recomm<strong>en</strong>d the use of aspir<strong>in</strong> as antiplatelet therapy for all adults with<br />

type 2 diabetes. Aspir<strong>in</strong> is a safe, <strong>in</strong>exp<strong>en</strong>sive, and readily available therapy that is<br />

effective for prev<strong>en</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g cardiovascular disease, and pati<strong>en</strong>ts with type 2 diabetes are<br />

particularly likely to b<strong>en</strong>efit from such prev<strong>en</strong>tive therapy.<br />

However, we found significant un<strong>de</strong>ruse of aspir<strong>in</strong> therapy among our study population.<br />

Low dose aspir<strong>in</strong> should be <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>d and better promoted as a factor <strong>in</strong> high-quality,<br />

evi<strong>de</strong>nce-based diabetes managem<strong>en</strong>t.<br />

PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED WITH THE BEERS CRITERIA OF POTENTIALLY<br />

INAPPROPRIATE MEDICATION<br />

Digox<strong>in</strong> 196<br />

The <strong>in</strong>ci<strong>de</strong>nce of digox<strong>in</strong> toxicity <strong>in</strong>creases with age, largely because the two most<br />

common conditions that b<strong>en</strong>efit from use of digox<strong>in</strong>, congestive heart failure and atrial<br />

fibrillation, are markedly more preval<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> old age. Curr<strong>en</strong>t reviews conclu<strong>de</strong> that the<br />

drug still has b<strong>en</strong>eficial effects <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts who rema<strong>in</strong> symptomatic with appropriate<br />

treatm<strong>en</strong>t with diuretics and angiot<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>-convert<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong>zyme <strong>in</strong>hibitors. 197 Whether the<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly are more s<strong>en</strong>sitive to the effects of digox<strong>in</strong> because of age per se is unclear.<br />

However, several other factors r<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r the el<strong>de</strong>rly more susceptible to digox<strong>in</strong> toxicity.<br />

These <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> an age-related <strong>de</strong>cl<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong> r<strong>en</strong>al function and a <strong>de</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> volume of<br />

digox<strong>in</strong> distribution. There is also an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the number of comorbid conditions,<br />

<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g cardiovascular and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, which height<strong>en</strong>s<br />

susceptibility to digox<strong>in</strong> toxicity. Moreover, treatm<strong>en</strong>t of these diseases with such<br />

<strong>in</strong>teractive medications as qu<strong>in</strong>id<strong>in</strong>e and calcium channel blockers may <strong>in</strong>crease the<br />

serum level of digox<strong>in</strong>. Similarly, such electrolyte imbalances as hypokalemia and<br />

hypomagnesemia occur more frequ<strong>en</strong>tly <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly as a result of diuretic therapy.<br />

Oxybut<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong> 198<br />

Oxybutyn<strong>in</strong> is a tertiary am<strong>in</strong>e with antichol<strong>in</strong>ergic and spasmolytic effects on the<br />

blad<strong>de</strong>r smooth muscle. It was <strong>de</strong>veloped specifically for overactive blad<strong>de</strong>r and to<br />

suppress <strong>in</strong>voluntary blad<strong>de</strong>r contractions. Oxybutyn<strong>in</strong> works by a direct antispasmodic<br />

action on smooth muscle and <strong>in</strong>hibits the muscar<strong>in</strong>ic action of acetylchol<strong>in</strong>e on smooth<br />

muscle. It is selective for muscar<strong>in</strong>ic receptors on the <strong>de</strong>trusor and is more pot<strong>en</strong>t and<br />

more direct than atrop<strong>in</strong>e. Despite an improved antichol<strong>in</strong>ergic si<strong>de</strong> effect profile, si<strong>de</strong><br />

effects are still frequ<strong>en</strong>tly dose limit<strong>in</strong>g, or cannot be tolerated <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly.<br />

Antichol<strong>in</strong>ergic effects are important causes of acute and chronic confusional states.<br />

Nevertheless, polypharmacy with antichol<strong>in</strong>ergic compounds is common, especially <strong>in</strong>


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 103<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts. Rec<strong>en</strong>t studies have suggested that the total bur<strong>de</strong>n of<br />

antichol<strong>in</strong>ergic drugs may <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong>e <strong>de</strong>velopm<strong>en</strong>t of <strong>de</strong>lirium rather than any s<strong>in</strong>gle<br />

ag<strong>en</strong>t.<br />

Amiodarone 199<br />

Beers criteria for safe medication use <strong>in</strong> ol<strong>de</strong>r adults <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> also amiodarone.<br />

Amiodarone is consi<strong>de</strong>red a "broad spectrum" antiarrhythmic medication, that is, it has<br />

multiple and complex effects on the electrical activity of the heart which is responsible<br />

for the heart's rhythm. Amiodarone is used for many serious arrhythmias of the heart<br />

<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g v<strong>en</strong>tricular fibrillation, v<strong>en</strong>tricular tachycardia, atrial fibrillation, and atrial<br />

flutter. Although amiodarone has many si<strong>de</strong> effects, some of which are severe and<br />

pot<strong>en</strong>tially fatal, it has be<strong>en</strong> successful <strong>in</strong> treat<strong>in</strong>g many arrhythmias where other<br />

antiarrhythmics fail. In addition to be<strong>in</strong>g an antiarrhythmic medication, amiodarone also<br />

causes blood vessels to dilate. This effect can result <strong>in</strong> a drop <strong>in</strong> blood pressure.<br />

Amiodarone may <strong>in</strong>teract with beta- blockers, or certa<strong>in</strong> calcium-channel blockers, such<br />

as verapamil or diltiazem, result<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> an excessively slow heart rate or a block <strong>in</strong> the<br />

conduction of the electrical impulse through the heart. It is recomm<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d that the dose<br />

of digox<strong>in</strong> is cut by 50% wh<strong>en</strong> amiodarone therapy is started. Amiodarone can result <strong>in</strong><br />

ph<strong>en</strong>yto<strong>in</strong> toxicity because it causes a two- or three-fold <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> blood<br />

conc<strong>en</strong>trations of ph<strong>en</strong>yto<strong>in</strong>. Symptoms of ph<strong>en</strong>yto<strong>in</strong> toxicity <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> unsteady eye<br />

movem<strong>en</strong>t (temporary and reversible), tiredness and unsteady gait. Amiodarone also<br />

can <strong>in</strong>teract with tricyclic anti<strong>de</strong>pressants (e.g. amitriptyl<strong>in</strong>e), or ph<strong>en</strong>othiaz<strong>in</strong>es and<br />

pot<strong>en</strong>tially cause serious arrhythmias. Amiodarone <strong>in</strong>teracts with warfar<strong>in</strong> and <strong>in</strong>creases<br />

the risk of bleed<strong>in</strong>g. The bleed<strong>in</strong>g can be serious or ev<strong>en</strong> fatal. This effect can occur as<br />

early as 4-6 days after the start of the comb<strong>in</strong>ation of drugs or can be <strong>de</strong>layed by a few<br />

weeks.<br />

Nifedip<strong>in</strong>e 200<br />

Calcium antagonists have long be<strong>en</strong> used as first-l<strong>in</strong>e drugs for hypert<strong>en</strong>sion and ang<strong>in</strong>a.<br />

However, <strong>de</strong>leterious effects have also be<strong>en</strong> reported <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts treated with calcium<br />

antagonists. A fall <strong>in</strong> diastolic BP and a rapid <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> heart rate can be associated<br />

with ischemic episo<strong>de</strong>s without with nifedip<strong>in</strong>e. Slow-release nifedip<strong>in</strong>e may <strong>in</strong>duce<br />

myocardial ischemia through a heart-rate <strong>in</strong>crease and a <strong>de</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> coronary blood<br />

flow due to lower diastolic BP <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts with severe coronary artery disease.<br />

Gastric ulcer and NSAID 201<br />

Non-steroidal anti-<strong>in</strong>flammatory drugs <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g aspir<strong>in</strong> use is the second most common<br />

aetiologic factor for peptic ulcer disease and a major factor for peptic ulcer<br />

complications. The use of non-steroidal anti-<strong>in</strong>flammatory drugs, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g cyclooxyg<strong>en</strong>ase-2<br />

<strong>in</strong>hibitors, may <strong>in</strong>crease the short-term risk of complications and <strong>de</strong>ath <strong>in</strong><br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts with bleed<strong>in</strong>g peptic ulcers.<br />

Fall risk and b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es<br />

In our study, more than half of the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts with fall risk took<br />

b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es. B<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es have be<strong>en</strong> recognized as an <strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt risk factor<br />

(IRF) for falls among the el<strong>de</strong>rly. B<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es may produce <strong>in</strong>appropriate sedation<br />

and psychomotor impairm<strong>en</strong>t and are associated with an <strong>in</strong>creased risk of falls and hip<br />

fractures. 202 A rec<strong>en</strong>t prospective, multi-c<strong>en</strong>tre study of approximately 8,000<br />

hospitalized pati<strong>en</strong>ts showed that b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es with very short and short half-lives<br />

were positively associated with falls dur<strong>in</strong>g a hospital stay and that their use is an IRF for<br />

falls. 203 The study also showed that pati<strong>en</strong>ts were at a greater risk of falls if they were<br />

receiv<strong>in</strong>g other psychotropic ag<strong>en</strong>ts or diabetic ag<strong>en</strong>ts, if they had cognitive impairm<strong>en</strong>t,<br />

a high level of comorbidity, advanced age (>80 years), or if they stayed <strong>in</strong> the hospital<br />

for 17 days or more. Long-act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es have be<strong>en</strong> shown to markedly<br />

<strong>in</strong>crease the risk of falls and hip fracture. 203 Up to 20% of ol<strong>de</strong>r adults take<br />

b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es; b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>e use is more common among wom<strong>en</strong>, whereas alcohol<br />

use and abuse is more common among m<strong>en</strong>. 204 Prescriptions for these ag<strong>en</strong>ts should be<br />

carefully evaluated <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutionalized el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts.


104 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED WITH THE BEDNURS CRITERIA<br />

205, 206<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation of psychotropics<br />

Use of psychotropic medication is very common <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts. The<br />

preval<strong>en</strong>ce of committant prescrib<strong>in</strong>g of psychotropic drugs <strong>in</strong> our study is substantial.<br />

This may be a pot<strong>en</strong>tially important and avoidable risk factor for drug-related illness <strong>in</strong><br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly people. It has be<strong>en</strong> shown <strong>in</strong> the literature that abundant sedative drug use has<br />

be<strong>en</strong> associated with high age, female g<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r, poor basic education, poor health habits<br />

(e.g., smok<strong>in</strong>g), <strong>de</strong>pression, <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia, or impaired mobility. Users also have poor selfperceived<br />

health. More studies are nee<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> this field. Physicians car<strong>in</strong>g for nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home resi<strong>de</strong>nts require further education on the b<strong>en</strong>efits and adverse effects of<br />

psychotropic drugs <strong>in</strong> frail el<strong>de</strong>rly people.<br />

Chronic use of antipsychotics 207<br />

Cont<strong>in</strong>uous use of antipsychotics <strong>in</strong> our study exceeds 10%. It has be<strong>en</strong> shown <strong>in</strong> the<br />

literature that chronic use of antipsychotic has be<strong>en</strong> related to both <strong>de</strong>pressive<br />

symptomatology and sleep problems. If a pati<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>itially has respon<strong>de</strong>d well, the<br />

follow<strong>in</strong>g duration of treatm<strong>en</strong>t before attempt<strong>in</strong>g to taper and discont<strong>in</strong>ue the<br />

antipsychotic has be<strong>en</strong> recomm<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d: <strong>de</strong>lirium, 1 week; agitated <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia, taper with<strong>in</strong><br />

3-6 months. Comb<strong>in</strong>ations with carbamazep<strong>in</strong>e, tricyclic anti<strong>de</strong>pressant and fluoxet<strong>in</strong>e<br />

have be<strong>en</strong> consi<strong>de</strong>red as contra<strong>in</strong>dicated. Extra monitor<strong>in</strong>g has be<strong>en</strong> recomm<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d<br />

wh<strong>en</strong> comb<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g any antipsychotic with lithium, lamotrig<strong>in</strong>e, or valproate or with<br />

co<strong>de</strong><strong>in</strong>e, ph<strong>en</strong>yto<strong>in</strong>, or tramadol.<br />

208, 209<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation of ACE-<strong>in</strong>hibitors and potassium or potassium-sav<strong>in</strong>g diuretics<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation of ACE-<strong>in</strong>hibitors and potassium or potassium-sav<strong>in</strong>g diuretics was found<br />

<strong>in</strong> more than 10% of the participants <strong>in</strong> our study. A pot<strong>en</strong>tially serious si<strong>de</strong> effect of<br />

tak<strong>in</strong>g ACE <strong>in</strong>hibitors is <strong>in</strong>creased blood potassium levels. Tak<strong>in</strong>g potassium<br />

supplem<strong>en</strong>ts, potassium-conta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g salt substitutes or large amounts of high-potassium<br />

foods at the same time as ACE <strong>in</strong>hibitors is not recomm<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d. Potassium spar<strong>in</strong>g<br />

diuretics have g<strong>en</strong>erally be<strong>en</strong> avoi<strong>de</strong>d <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts receiv<strong>in</strong>g ACE <strong>in</strong>hibitors, ow<strong>in</strong>g to the<br />

pot<strong>en</strong>tial risk of hyperkalaemia. Nevertheless, a rec<strong>en</strong>t randomised placebo controlled<br />

study, the randomised aldactone evaluation study (RALES), reported that hyperkalaemia<br />

is uncommon wh<strong>en</strong> low dose spironolactone (25 mg daily) is comb<strong>in</strong>ed with an ACE<br />

<strong>in</strong>hibitor. Risk factors for <strong>de</strong>velop<strong>in</strong>g hyperkalaemia <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> spironolactone dose >50<br />

mg/day, high doses of ACE <strong>in</strong>hibitor, or evi<strong>de</strong>nce of r<strong>en</strong>al impairm<strong>en</strong>t. It is<br />

recomm<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d that measurem<strong>en</strong>t of the serum creat<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>e and potassium conc<strong>en</strong>trations<br />

is performed with<strong>in</strong> 5-7 days of the addition of a potassium spar<strong>in</strong>g diuretic to an ACE<br />

<strong>in</strong>hibitor until the levels are stable, and th<strong>en</strong> every one to three months.<br />

Longact<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es 210<br />

B<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es with oxidative pathways and longer half-lives, such as chlordiazepoxi<strong>de</strong>,<br />

diazepam, and flurazepam, are more likely to accumulate <strong>in</strong> the body and cause<br />

prolonged sedation. Long-act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es are not recomm<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d for el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts because they <strong>in</strong>crease the risk of impaired cognitive function, falls, and hip<br />

fractures. The preval<strong>en</strong>ce of long-term b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>e use among nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> our study does not exceed 5%. Nevertheless, this topic merits att<strong>en</strong>tion<br />

giv<strong>en</strong> that this segm<strong>en</strong>t of the population could be expected to grow and giv<strong>en</strong> that<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly persons are particularly prone to adverse reactions to b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es.<br />

Neuropsychiatric symptoms of <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia are common and associated with poor<br />

outcomes for pati<strong>en</strong>ts and caregivers. Although non-pharmacological <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tions<br />

should be the first l<strong>in</strong>e of treatm<strong>en</strong>t, a wi<strong>de</strong> variety of pharmacological ag<strong>en</strong>ts are used<br />

<strong>in</strong> the managem<strong>en</strong>t of neuropsychiatric symptoms; therefore, concise, curr<strong>en</strong>t,<br />

evi<strong>de</strong>nce-based recomm<strong>en</strong>dations are nee<strong>de</strong>d. Rec<strong>en</strong>tly a systematic review on this<br />

subject was conducted by S<strong>in</strong>k et al. 211 They conclu<strong>de</strong>d that pharmacological therapies<br />

are not particularly effective for managem<strong>en</strong>t of neuropsychiatric symptoms of<br />

<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 105<br />

PROBLEMS WITH MEDICATIONS WITH LIMITED EVIDENCE BASE FOR EFFICACY<br />

Piroxicam is a nonsteroidal anti-<strong>in</strong>flammatory drug (NSAID). Used for the managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

of several differ<strong>en</strong>t symptoms and numerous conditions, NSAIDs as a group cont<strong>in</strong>ue to<br />

be among the most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly prescribed medications. Nevertheless, physicians<br />

g<strong>en</strong>erally recognize that the pru<strong>de</strong>nt use of NSAIDs requires cognizance of pot<strong>en</strong>tial<br />

si<strong>de</strong> effects. Cl<strong>in</strong>ical experi<strong>en</strong>ce suggests that, although complications can occur early <strong>in</strong><br />

the course of treatm<strong>en</strong>t, they are more likely to occur with chronic use. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to<br />

the revised Beers criteria piroxicam belongs to pot<strong>en</strong>tially <strong>in</strong>appropriate medications for<br />

the el<strong>de</strong>rly.<br />

Gastro<strong>in</strong>test<strong>in</strong>al toxicity is the most frequ<strong>en</strong>tly <strong>en</strong>countered si<strong>de</strong> effect associated with<br />

piroxicam and other NSAIDs and pres<strong>en</strong>ts consi<strong>de</strong>rable concern. Approximately one<br />

half of all hospital admissions for a bleed<strong>in</strong>g ulcer are attributed to the use of NSAIDs,<br />

aspir<strong>in</strong>, or the two tak<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> comb<strong>in</strong>ation dur<strong>in</strong>g the week prior to admission. 212 The<br />

relative risk of gastric ulcer (4.7), duo<strong>de</strong>nal ulcer (1.1 to 1.6), bleed<strong>in</strong>g (3.8), perforation,<br />

and <strong>de</strong>ath are all <strong>in</strong>creased by NSAID use wh<strong>en</strong> such pati<strong>en</strong>ts are compared to those<br />

who do not take these products. Pati<strong>en</strong>ts at <strong>in</strong>creased risk of <strong>de</strong>velop<strong>in</strong>g GI<br />

complications <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> those with a prior history of peptic ulcer and especially those<br />

with prior upper GI bleed<strong>in</strong>g, regardless of the source. These pati<strong>en</strong>ts had a relative risk<br />

of 13.5 for a recurr<strong>en</strong>t complication. 213<br />

R<strong>en</strong>al complications are the second greatest concern associated with piroxicam use.<br />

R<strong>en</strong>al si<strong>de</strong> effects <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong> fluid and electrolyte disturbances such as sodium and water<br />

ret<strong>en</strong>tion and/or hyperkalemia. Acute r<strong>en</strong>al failure, nephrotic syndrome with acute<br />

<strong>in</strong>terstitial nephritis, and papillary necrosis may also occur. 214 Although r<strong>en</strong>al ev<strong>en</strong>ts are<br />

uncommon, they can have profound consequ<strong>en</strong>ces if the drug use is not stopped and<br />

appropriate care is not <strong>in</strong>itiated.<br />

The effect of piroxicam on the function of antihypert<strong>en</strong>sive medications is another area<br />

of concern. Concomitant use of NSAIDs plus antihypert<strong>en</strong>sive medication <strong>in</strong>creases<br />

with age to greater than 50% among the el<strong>de</strong>rly. 215 A large, case-controlled study of<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts more than 65 years of age <strong>de</strong>monstrated that rec<strong>en</strong>t users of NSAIDs had a<br />

1.7-fold <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> risk of <strong>in</strong>itiat<strong>in</strong>g antihypert<strong>en</strong>sive therapy wh<strong>en</strong> compared with non-<br />

NSAID users. 216 It appears that NSAID use reduces the antihypert<strong>en</strong>sive effects of<br />

angiot<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>-convert<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong>zyme (ACE) <strong>in</strong>hibitors to the greatest <strong>de</strong>gree while hav<strong>in</strong>g<br />

lesser effects on beta blockers, diuretics, vasodilators, and calcium channel blockers. 217,<br />

215<br />

Allergy to piroxicam and other NSAIDs occurs <strong>in</strong> approximately 0.3% of the population.<br />

A not uncommon si<strong>de</strong> effect associated with piroxicam is <strong>in</strong>terfer<strong>en</strong>ce with hemostatic<br />

disor<strong>de</strong>rs. Aspir<strong>in</strong> irreversibly acetylates cyclooxyg<strong>en</strong>ase and thereby <strong>in</strong>hibits synthesis<br />

of both TXA 2 and PGI 2. In contrast, NSAIDs reversibly <strong>in</strong>hibit cyclooxyg<strong>en</strong>ase. There is<br />

conflict<strong>in</strong>g evi<strong>de</strong>nce as to whether aspir<strong>in</strong> and other NSAIDs are associated with<br />

<strong>in</strong>creased bleed<strong>in</strong>g from surgery. 218 However, where an association is suspected, the<br />

follow<strong>in</strong>g factors may port<strong>en</strong>d a high risk for bleed<strong>in</strong>g complications: age ol<strong>de</strong>r than 60<br />

years, bleed<strong>in</strong>g disor<strong>de</strong>rs, liver dysfunction, thrombocytop<strong>en</strong>ia, and other risk factors<br />

such as alcohol use and use of oral anticoagulants.<br />

Betahist<strong>in</strong>e is advocated as a vestibular suppressant ma<strong>in</strong>ly for M<strong>en</strong>iere's disease.<br />

Betahist<strong>in</strong>e was approved by the US FDA about 30 years ago for roughly 5 years, but<br />

later approval was withdrawn because lack of evi<strong>de</strong>nce for efficacy and because the<br />

major report of effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess conta<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>de</strong>fici<strong>en</strong>cies and misrepres<strong>en</strong>tations. 219<br />

Subsequ<strong>en</strong>tly, four double-bl<strong>in</strong>d studies have be<strong>en</strong> done report<strong>in</strong>g reduction of vertigo<br />

attacks with betahist<strong>in</strong>e. 220-223 Nevertheless, these studies may have be<strong>en</strong> flawed and a<br />

rec<strong>en</strong>t review suggested that it is pres<strong>en</strong>tly still unclear if betahist<strong>in</strong>e has any effect <strong>in</strong><br />

M<strong>en</strong>iere's disease. 224 Betahist<strong>in</strong>e was aga<strong>in</strong> reviewed by the FDA <strong>in</strong> June of 1999.<br />

Ess<strong>en</strong>tially, the conclusion seems to be that there is no evi<strong>de</strong>nce that it is harmful, but<br />

also little evi<strong>de</strong>nce that it has any therapeutic effect. It thus is similar <strong>in</strong> official status to<br />

an <strong>in</strong>ert substance.


106 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

4.4 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS<br />

4.4.1 The magnitu<strong>de</strong> of medication use and costs for long-term resi<strong>de</strong>ntial<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> Belgium<br />

The national aggregated data on drug utilization <strong>in</strong> Belgian rest- and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

clearly illustrate certa<strong>in</strong> prescription patterns, habits and oft<strong>en</strong> large geographical<br />

differ<strong>en</strong>ces for those drugs that are l<strong>in</strong>ked to one or a limited number of <strong>in</strong>dications.<br />

The field study (PHEBE project) showed the high number of 8 chronic medications per<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt among resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, highly related to the polypathology of the<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts.<br />

Albeit only 1.4% of the Belgian population lives <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, the data from this<br />

study and data from national claims databases mm <strong>in</strong>dicate that 5.6% of the public<br />

exp<strong>en</strong>ditures on medication (pharmaceutical specialties) may be g<strong>en</strong>erated by nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home resi<strong>de</strong>nts (123 million € <strong>in</strong> 2004 <strong>in</strong> Belgium). Resi<strong>de</strong>nts of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes g<strong>en</strong>erate<br />

consi<strong>de</strong>rable public exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for pharmaceutical care (90 € per month), but also pay<br />

hefty amounts of personal money out-of-pocket for co-paym<strong>en</strong>t of chronic reimbursed<br />

medic<strong>in</strong>es (23 € per month) as well as for paym<strong>en</strong>ts to the pharmacy for nonreimbursed<br />

medication (27 € per month).<br />

4.4.2 The medical needs of resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes<br />

We <strong>de</strong>tected an average of 5 medical problems per resi<strong>de</strong>nt (2.7 cl<strong>in</strong>ical problems and<br />

2.6 care problems). The treat<strong>in</strong>g physician categorized 46% of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts as<br />

<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>ted, and 35% as <strong>de</strong>pressed, with an overlap betwe<strong>en</strong> the two diseases of 16%. At<br />

the mom<strong>en</strong>t of the survey, 9% of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts were <strong>in</strong> palliative care, of which one <strong>in</strong><br />

three was <strong>in</strong> term<strong>in</strong>al care.<br />

The number of medical diagnoses does not <strong>in</strong>crease with <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g age, <strong>in</strong> contrast to<br />

the number of care problems by resi<strong>de</strong>nt, show<strong>in</strong>g a significant <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the very old.<br />

4.4.3 Measurem<strong>en</strong>t of the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

The average number of pot<strong>en</strong>tial prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality problems per resi<strong>de</strong>nt was high. A<br />

number of cl<strong>in</strong>ically relevant problems with a substantial preval<strong>en</strong>ce could be i<strong>de</strong>ntified<br />

as a possible target for prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality improvem<strong>en</strong>t programs.<br />

None of the exist<strong>in</strong>g sets of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>in</strong>dicators provi<strong>de</strong>s a compreh<strong>en</strong>sive<br />

view of the differ<strong>en</strong>t aspects of evi<strong>de</strong>nce-based cl<strong>in</strong>ical practice, and all require further<br />

adaptation to local medical practices. The implem<strong>en</strong>tation of accepted sets of<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>in</strong>dicators requires more explicit specifications for the <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>ition of<br />

drug classes <strong>in</strong> terms of the Anatomic Therapeutic Chemical Classification (ATC) of the<br />

World Health Organization. In addition, further validation of physician assessed lists of<br />

medical diagnoses and care problems is nee<strong>de</strong>d. F<strong>in</strong>ally, validation is nee<strong>de</strong>d of the<br />

application of these sets of quality <strong>in</strong>dicators <strong>in</strong> the context of automated analysis of<br />

medication charts.<br />

4.4.4 The g<strong>en</strong>eral characteristics of Belgian nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and their medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t systems<br />

Belgium has a well-established network of rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes with<strong>in</strong> its cities and<br />

villages, ma<strong>in</strong>ly run by community social services, by religious charities or by private forprofit<br />

corporations. Belgian resi<strong>de</strong>ntial homes for the el<strong>de</strong>rly have a mix of resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

where slightly and highly <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt pati<strong>en</strong>ts and <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>ted and non-<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>ted pati<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

live together <strong>in</strong> one <strong>in</strong>stitution. Many resi<strong>de</strong>nts are still supervised by their former<br />

g<strong>en</strong>eral practitioner, but <strong>in</strong> some nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes the coord<strong>in</strong>at<strong>in</strong>g physician is<br />

responsible for more than half of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts of the home. The large majority of<br />

mm Public exp<strong>en</strong>ditures on pharmaceutical specialties amounted to 2,213 million € <strong>in</strong> 2004 (personal<br />

communication M De Falleur RIZIV/INAMI).


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 107<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes are served by community pharmacists, with little <strong>en</strong>gagem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

pharmacy activities. About one <strong>in</strong> t<strong>en</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes is served by a hospital pharmacist.<br />

The medication managem<strong>en</strong>t systems <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes are poorly <strong>de</strong>veloped and<br />

focus ma<strong>in</strong>ly on the distribution process <strong>in</strong>si<strong>de</strong> the <strong>in</strong>stitution, and less on the<br />

appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g. Few resi<strong>de</strong>nts manage to keep some form of autonomy<br />

with regard to medication, except <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions with limited staff and poor distribution<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t.<br />

Although a drug formulary is formally available <strong>in</strong> most <strong>in</strong>stitutions, the implem<strong>en</strong>tation<br />

of this formulary and its impact on the drug choice process of the visit<strong>in</strong>g physicians<br />

seems to be limited. Nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes run by the local community social service<br />

(OCMW/CPAS) more oft<strong>en</strong> have a hospital pharmacist runn<strong>in</strong>g the medication supply<br />

to the <strong>in</strong>stitution, more oft<strong>en</strong> have coord<strong>in</strong>at<strong>in</strong>g physician treat<strong>in</strong>g a high number of<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts with<strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>stitution, and more oft<strong>en</strong> have more <strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong>se medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t systems.<br />

4.4.5 Institutional characteristics associated with the quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

In the field study, lower quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g was associated with the location of the<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home <strong>in</strong> Ha<strong>in</strong>aut, and with a lower number of resi<strong>de</strong>nts per att<strong>en</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g physician.<br />

Higher quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g was associated with higher activity of the coord<strong>in</strong>at<strong>in</strong>g<br />

physician, better implem<strong>en</strong>tation of the formulary, and greater activity of the <strong>de</strong>liver<strong>in</strong>g<br />

pharmacist. Higher exp<strong>en</strong>ditures were associated with the prov<strong>in</strong>ce of Ha<strong>in</strong>aut and with<br />

the abs<strong>en</strong>ce of price competition.<br />

With regard to the impact of case-mix, we observed that the volume of medication<br />

usage did not <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the very old. Dem<strong>en</strong>tia and <strong>en</strong>d-of-life care seems to be<br />

associated with a <strong>de</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the volume of medication usage.<br />

4.4.6 Implications for research and practice<br />

There is a need for reliable and feasible scales to assess the case-mix of <strong>in</strong>stitutions and<br />

the cont<strong>in</strong>uous functional assessm<strong>en</strong>t of <strong>in</strong>dividual resi<strong>de</strong>nts. Giv<strong>en</strong> the imm<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>t digital<br />

revolution <strong>in</strong> health care facilities, the transformation of the pharmaceutical and cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

data collection methods <strong>in</strong> this cross-sectional research to tools for cont<strong>in</strong>uous,<br />

automated data-collection based on computerized nurs<strong>in</strong>g records seems feasible. The<br />

effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess of collective feedback on prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>in</strong>dicators to the community<br />

of visit<strong>in</strong>g physicians to a nurs<strong>in</strong>g home merits further <strong>in</strong>vestigation.<br />

Interv<strong>en</strong>tions to <strong>en</strong>hance the quality and the affordability of medications <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes will be more cost-effective wh<strong>en</strong> these <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tions not only have an impact on<br />

the drug choice process for resi<strong>de</strong>nts of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, but also on the drug choice<br />

process for all el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts on the list of the g<strong>en</strong>eral practitioners.


108 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Robert Van<strong>de</strong>r Stichele <strong>in</strong>itiated and coord<strong>in</strong>ated the project, conducted the literature review,<br />

participated <strong>in</strong> the <strong>de</strong>sign, data collection and data analysis and <strong>in</strong> writ<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and edit<strong>in</strong>g the manuscript.<br />

Car<strong>in</strong>e Van <strong>de</strong> Voor<strong>de</strong> supervised the project, participated <strong>in</strong> the data collection and analysis of<br />

the national aggregated data on nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and <strong>in</strong> writ<strong>in</strong>g and edit<strong>in</strong>g<br />

the manuscript.<br />

Monique Elseviers participated <strong>in</strong> the <strong>de</strong>sign, was responsible for the organization of the data<br />

collection <strong>in</strong> Dutch nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, for the managem<strong>en</strong>t of data-<strong>en</strong>try and<br />

databases, for the statistical analysis, and participated <strong>in</strong> the writ<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

edit<strong>in</strong>g of the manuscript.<br />

Charlotte Verrue participated <strong>in</strong> the <strong>de</strong>sign of the questionnaire and score for medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t systems, <strong>in</strong> conduct<strong>in</strong>g the literature review, <strong>in</strong> the data<br />

collection <strong>in</strong> Dutch speak<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, and <strong>in</strong> writ<strong>in</strong>g and edit<strong>in</strong>g the<br />

manuscript.<br />

Kris So<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> was responsible for the coord<strong>in</strong>ation of the data collection and data-<strong>en</strong>try<br />

and for communication with actors <strong>in</strong> the field.<br />

Mirko Petrovic participated <strong>in</strong> the <strong>de</strong>sign of the cl<strong>in</strong>ical questionnaire, <strong>in</strong> the choice of the<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>in</strong>dicators and <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>terpretation of the results on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality.<br />

Pierre Chevalier coord<strong>in</strong>ated the field study <strong>in</strong> the Fr<strong>en</strong>ch speak<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and<br />

participated <strong>in</strong> the <strong>de</strong>sign of the cl<strong>in</strong>ical questionnaire.<br />

Mike Smet was responsible for the multivariate statistical analysis.<br />

Tom De Floor participated <strong>in</strong> the data collection <strong>in</strong> the Dutch speak<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.<br />

Els Mehuys participated <strong>in</strong> the <strong>de</strong>sign of the questionnaire and score for medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t systems, and <strong>in</strong> writ<strong>in</strong>g the manuscript.<br />

Annemie Somers participated <strong>in</strong> the <strong>de</strong>sign of the questionnaire and score for medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t systems.<br />

Michel<strong>in</strong>e Gobert participated <strong>in</strong> the data collection and data <strong>en</strong>try <strong>in</strong> the Fr<strong>en</strong>ch speak<strong>in</strong>g<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and <strong>in</strong> edit<strong>in</strong>g the manuscript.<br />

Marc De Falleur participated <strong>in</strong> the data collection and analysis of the national aggregated<br />

data on nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.<br />

Marc Bauw<strong>en</strong>s participated <strong>in</strong> conduct<strong>in</strong>g the literature review and <strong>in</strong> the data collection <strong>in</strong><br />

the Dutch speak<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.<br />

Thierry Christia<strong>en</strong>s participated <strong>in</strong> the <strong>de</strong>sign of the cl<strong>in</strong>ical questionnaire and <strong>in</strong> the choice of<br />

the prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>in</strong>dicators.<br />

Anne Sp<strong>in</strong>ew<strong>in</strong>e participated <strong>in</strong> the data collection <strong>in</strong> the Fr<strong>en</strong>ch speak<strong>in</strong>g nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, <strong>in</strong><br />

the <strong>in</strong>terpretation of results on prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality and <strong>in</strong> edit<strong>in</strong>g the<br />

manuscript.<br />

Stephan Devriese participated <strong>in</strong> the data collection and analysis of the national aggregated<br />

data on nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and <strong>in</strong> writ<strong>in</strong>g and edit<strong>in</strong>g the manuscript.<br />

Dirk Ramaekers participated <strong>in</strong> the <strong>de</strong>sign and the project managem<strong>en</strong>t of the study, and <strong>in</strong><br />

the writ<strong>in</strong>g and edit<strong>in</strong>g of the manuscript and of the recomm<strong>en</strong>dations.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 109<br />

REFERENCES<br />

1. Nationaal Instituut voor <strong>de</strong> Statistiek [Homepage on the Internet]. Brussel: NIS;c 2001 [cited<br />

2006-12-05]. Mathematische <strong>de</strong>mografie. Bevolk<strong>in</strong>gsvooruitzicht<strong>en</strong>. Available from:<br />

http://www.statbel.fgov.be/pub/d2/p231y2000-2050_nl.pdf<br />

2. Pacolet J, Deliège D, Artois<strong>en</strong>et C, Cattaert G, Coudron V, Leroy X, et al. Vergrijz<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

gezondheidszorg <strong>en</strong> ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>zorg <strong>in</strong> België. Report. Brussel: 2004. (2004/DGSOC 32036)<br />

Available from:<br />

http://socialsecurity.fgov.be/nl/nieuws_publicaties/publicaties/vergrijz<strong>in</strong>g/rapport_vergrijz<strong>in</strong>g.pdf<br />

3. Mestdagh J, Lambrecht M. The AGIR project: Age<strong>in</strong>g, Health and Retirem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong> Europe. Use of<br />

health care and nurs<strong>in</strong>g care by the el<strong>de</strong>rly: Data for Belgium. Report. Brussels: Fe<strong>de</strong>ral<br />

Plann<strong>in</strong>g Bureau; 2003. (Work<strong>in</strong>g Paper 11-03) Available from:<br />

http://www.plan.be/nl/pub/wp/WP0311/WP0311<strong>en</strong>.pdf<br />

4. Abramowska A, Gourb<strong>in</strong> C, Wunsch G. Projections of the <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt el<strong>de</strong>rly population by<br />

age, sex, and household composition. Sc<strong>en</strong>arios for Belgium. Archives of Public Health.<br />

2005;63(5):243-57.<br />

5. Schulz E. Alternative sc<strong>en</strong>arios for health, life expectancy and social exp<strong>en</strong>diture. Report.<br />

Berl<strong>in</strong>: German Institute for Economic Research; 2005. (Enepri Research Report no. 4)<br />

Available from: http://www.<strong>en</strong>epri.org/Publications/RR04.pdf<br />

6. WHO. Home-based long-term care. Report of a WHO Study Group. G<strong>en</strong>eva: WHO Study<br />

Group; 1999. WHO Technical Report Series (898) Available from:<br />

http://libdoc.who.<strong>in</strong>t/trs/WHO_TRS_898.pdf<br />

7. Declercq A, Van Au<strong>de</strong>nhove C. Services for Support<strong>in</strong>g Family Carers of El<strong>de</strong>rly People <strong>in</strong><br />

Europe: Characteristics, Coverage and Usage. National Background Report for Belgium.<br />

Report. Leuv<strong>en</strong>: 2004. Eurofamcare project Available from:<br />

http://www.kuleuv<strong>en</strong>.be/lucas/PDF/nabare_belgium_rc1_a4.pdf<br />

8. Arnaert A, Heuvel BVD, W<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>y T. Health and social care policy for the el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong> Belgium.<br />

Geriatr Nurs. 2005;26(6):366-71.<br />

9. Huv<strong>en</strong>eers C, Kegels C, Mistia<strong>en</strong> P, van <strong>de</strong>r L<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>n J, Verl<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>n J. Prijsreguler<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> België, met<br />

e<strong>en</strong> toepass<strong>in</strong>g op <strong>de</strong> sector<strong>en</strong> van OTC-g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong>. Report. Brussel:<br />

Fe<strong>de</strong>raal Planbureau; 2005. (Work<strong>in</strong>g Paper 19-05) Available from:<br />

http://www.plan.be/nl/pub/wp/WP0519/WP0519nl.pdf<br />

10. RIZIV/INAMI. Rustoor<strong>de</strong>n voor bejaar<strong>de</strong>n, Rust- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>. Nieuw<br />

f<strong>in</strong>ancier<strong>in</strong>gssysteem vanaf 1 januari 2004. Brussel: RIZIV/INAMI; 2004. Available from:<br />

http://riziv.fgov.be/care/nl/resi<strong>de</strong>ntial-care/pdf/01-Brochure-nieuwe-f<strong>in</strong>ancier<strong>in</strong>g-1-1-2004.pdf<br />

11. RIZIV/INAMI. Farmaceutische k<strong>en</strong>getall<strong>en</strong> farmaceutische verstrekk<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> ambulante praktijk.<br />

Handleid<strong>in</strong>g. Brussel: RIZIV/INAMI; 2005. Available from:<br />

http://riziv.fgov.be/drug/nl/pharmanet/pharmaceutical-tables/pdf/2003/gui<strong>de</strong>2003.pdf<br />

12. Du Bois M, Morr<strong>en</strong> G. E<strong>en</strong> pilletje voor mijn eig<strong>en</strong> welbev<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>n. In: Proceed<strong>in</strong>gs of CMstudiedag<strong>en</strong>,<br />

Zorg voor resi<strong>de</strong>ntiële zorg; 2004 <strong>de</strong>c. 10; Bever<strong>en</strong> (Belgium): CM. Available<br />

from:<br />

http://www.cm.be/nl/126/di<strong>en</strong>st<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong>voor<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>/thuiszorg/studiedag<strong>en</strong>/studiedag_resi<strong>de</strong>ntiele_zo<br />

rg.jsp<br />

13. Bloem<strong>en</strong> R, Haub<strong>en</strong> L, Vosch C, Vranckx J. Medication policy and distribution <strong>in</strong> Belgian<br />

retirem<strong>en</strong>t homes [PowerPo<strong>in</strong>t].<br />

14. Van<strong>de</strong>r Stichele RH, Mestdagh J, Van Haecht CH, De Potter B, Bogaert MG. Medication<br />

utilization and pati<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> homes for the aged. Eur J Cl<strong>in</strong> Pharmacol. 1992;43(3):319-<br />

21.


110 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

15. Pitruzzella R, Franck J. Médications <strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions pour personnes âgées (Région Wallonne). La<br />

Revue <strong>de</strong> Gériatrie. 2005;30(1):13-22.<br />

16. K<strong>in</strong>g MS, Lipsky MS. Evaluation of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home pati<strong>en</strong>ts - A systematic approach can improve<br />

care. Postgraduate Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 2000;107(2):207-10.<br />

17. Bharucha AJ, Pandav R, Sh<strong>en</strong> CY, Dodge HH, Ganguli M. Predictors of nurs<strong>in</strong>g facility<br />

admission: A 12-year epi<strong>de</strong>miological study <strong>in</strong> the United States. Journal Of The American<br />

Geriatrics Society. 2004;52(3):434-9.<br />

18. Ch<strong>en</strong>ier MC. Review and analysis of caregiver bur<strong>de</strong>n and nurs<strong>in</strong>g home placem<strong>en</strong>t. Geriatric<br />

Nurs<strong>in</strong>g. 1997;18(3):121-6.<br />

19. Stewart ST. Do out-of-pocket health exp<strong>en</strong>ditures rise with age among ol<strong>de</strong>r Americans?<br />

Gerontologist. 2004;44(1):48-57.<br />

20. Chappell NL, Hav<strong>en</strong>s B, Hollan<strong>de</strong>r MJ, Miller JA, McWilliam C. Comparative costs of home<br />

care and resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care. Gerontologist. 2004;44(3):389-400.<br />

21. Guralnik JM, Alecxih L, Branch LG, Wi<strong>en</strong>er JM. Medical and long-term care costs wh<strong>en</strong> ol<strong>de</strong>r<br />

persons become more <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt. American Journal of Public Health. 2002;92(8):1244-5.<br />

22. Heckman GA, Misiaszek B, Merali F, Turpie ID, Patterson CJ, Flett N, et al. Managem<strong>en</strong>t of<br />

heart failure <strong>in</strong> Canadian long-term care facilities. Canadian Journal Of Cardiology.<br />

2004;20(10):963-9.<br />

23. Hass SL, Ransom JE, Brown RD, O'Fallon M, Whisnant JP, Leibson CL. The impact of stroke on<br />

the cost and level of care <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes: A retrospective population-based study. Mayo<br />

Cl<strong>in</strong>ic Proceed<strong>in</strong>gs. 2001;76(5):493-500.<br />

24. McCarberg BH. Rheumatic diseases <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly: Deal<strong>in</strong>g with rheumatic pa<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong> ext<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d<br />

care facilities. Cl<strong>in</strong>ics In Geriatric Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 2005;21(3):543-61.<br />

25. S<strong>in</strong>clair AJ, Gadsby R, P<strong>en</strong>fold S, Croxson SCM, Bayer AJ. Preval<strong>en</strong>ce of diabetes <strong>in</strong> care home<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts. Diabetes Care. 2001;24(6):1066-8.<br />

26. Eriks<strong>en</strong> HM, Ivers<strong>en</strong> BG, Aavitstand P. Preval<strong>en</strong>ce of nosocomial <strong>in</strong>fections and use of<br />

antibiotics <strong>in</strong> long-term care facilities <strong>in</strong> Norway, 2002 and 2003. Journal Of Hospital Infection.<br />

2004;57(4):316-20.<br />

27. Hanset M. New action plan aga<strong>in</strong>st Staphylococcus aureaus methicill<strong>in</strong>e resistant (MRSA) <strong>in</strong><br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. Revue Medicale <strong>de</strong> Bruxelles. 2005;26(4):S275-8.<br />

28. Wu N, Miller SC, Lapane K, Roy J, Mor V. Impact of cognitive function on assessm<strong>en</strong>ts of<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts' pa<strong>in</strong>. Medical Care. 2005;43(9):934-9.<br />

29. Spronk GS, Scholzel-Dor<strong>en</strong>bos CJ, Jellesma-Egg<strong>en</strong>kamp MJ. Confus<strong>in</strong>g stories, not always<br />

confusion! Language disor<strong>de</strong>rs and <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia. Tijdschrift voor gerontologie <strong>en</strong> geriatrie.<br />

2003;34(5):222-6.<br />

30. Jong<strong>en</strong>elis K, Pot AM, Eisses AMH, Beekman ATF, Kluiter H, Ribbe MW. Preval<strong>en</strong>ce and risk<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicators of <strong>de</strong>pression <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly nurs<strong>in</strong>g home pati<strong>en</strong>ts: the AGED study. Journal Of Affective<br />

Disor<strong>de</strong>rs. 2004;83(2-3):135-42.<br />

31. Eisses AMH, Kluiter H, Jong<strong>en</strong>elis K, Pot AM, Beekman ATF, Ormel J. Care staff tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>de</strong>tection of <strong>de</strong>pression <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial homes for the el<strong>de</strong>rly - Randomised trial. British Journal<br />

Of Psychiatry. 2005;186:404-9.<br />

32. Voytas JJ. Unmet visual needs <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g home: Wait until dark? Journal of the american<br />

medical directors association. 2005;6(4):284-5.<br />

33. Garahan MB, Waller JA, Houghton M, Tisdale WA, Runge CF. Hear<strong>in</strong>g-Loss Preval<strong>en</strong>ce And<br />

Managem<strong>en</strong>t In Nurs<strong>in</strong>g-Home Resi<strong>de</strong>nts. Journal Of The American Geriatrics Society.<br />

1992;40(2):130-4.<br />

34. Isaksson R, So<strong>de</strong>rfeldt B, Ne<strong>de</strong>rfors T. Oral treatm<strong>en</strong>t need and oral treatm<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong>tion <strong>in</strong> a<br />

population <strong>en</strong>rolled <strong>in</strong> long-term care <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and home care. Acta Odontologica<br />

Scand<strong>in</strong>avica. 2003;61(1):11-8.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 111<br />

35. Thompson DL. Geriatric <strong>in</strong>cont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>ce: the long-term care chall<strong>en</strong>ge. Urologic nus<strong>in</strong>g: official<br />

journal of the American Urologic Association Allied. 2004;24(4):305-13, 56, quiz 14.<br />

36. Williams KN, Ilt<strong>en</strong> TB, Bower h. Meet<strong>in</strong>g communication needs: topics of talk <strong>in</strong> the nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home. Journal of psychosocial nurs<strong>in</strong>g and m<strong>en</strong>tal health services. 2005;43(7):38-45.<br />

37. Scott PA, Valimaki M, Le<strong>in</strong>o-Kilpi H, Dass<strong>en</strong> T. Autonomy, privacy and <strong>in</strong>formed cons<strong>en</strong>t:<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly care perspectives. British Journal Of Nurs<strong>in</strong>g. 2003;12(3):158-68.<br />

38. Schnelle JF, Bates-J<strong>en</strong>s<strong>en</strong> BM, Levy-Storms L, Grbic V, Yoshii J, Cadogan M, et al. The m<strong>in</strong>imum<br />

data set preval<strong>en</strong>ce of restra<strong>in</strong>t quality <strong>in</strong>dicator: Does it reflect differ<strong>en</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> care?<br />

Gerontologist. 2004;44(2):245-55.<br />

39. Butterworth C. Ongo<strong>in</strong>g cons<strong>en</strong>t to care for ol<strong>de</strong>r people <strong>in</strong> care homes. Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Standards.<br />

2005;19(20):40-5.<br />

40. Van<strong>de</strong>r Stichele RH, Mestdagh J, Van Haecht CHM, De Potter B, Bogaert MG. Medication<br />

utilization and pati<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> homes for the aged. European Journal Of Cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

Pharmacology. 1992;43:319-21.<br />

41. Jones D, Poole C. Medic<strong>in</strong>e tak<strong>in</strong>g by el<strong>de</strong>rly people: An overview. In: George CF, Woodhouse<br />

KW, editors. Drug Therapy <strong>in</strong> Old Age. Chichester, UK: Wiley and Sons; 1998. p. 1-22.<br />

42. Hanlon JT, Schma<strong>de</strong>r KE, Boult C, Artz MB, Gross CR, Fill<strong>en</strong>baum GG, et al. Use of<br />

<strong>in</strong>appropriate prescription drugs by ol<strong>de</strong>r people. Journal Of The American Geriatrics Society.<br />

2002;50(1):26-34.<br />

43. Ostrom JR, Hammarlund ER, Christ<strong>en</strong>s<strong>en</strong> DB, Ple<strong>in</strong> JB, Kethley AJ. Medication Usage In An<br />

El<strong>de</strong>rly Population. Medical Care. 1985;23(2):157-64.<br />

44. Chrischilles EA, Foley DJ, Wallace RB, Lemke JH, Semla TP, Hanlon JT, et al. Use Of<br />

Medications By Persons 65 And Over - Data From The Established Populations For<br />

Epi<strong>de</strong>miologic Studies Of The El<strong>de</strong>rly. Journals Of Gerontology. 1992;47(5):M137-M44.<br />

45. Beers MH, Ouslan<strong>de</strong>r JG, F<strong>in</strong>gold SF, Morg<strong>en</strong>stern H, Reub<strong>en</strong> DB, Rogers W, et al.<br />

Inappropriate Medication Prescrib<strong>in</strong>g In Skilled-Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Facilities. Annals Of Internal Medic<strong>in</strong>e.<br />

1992;117(8):684-9.<br />

46. Grymonpre RE, Mit<strong>en</strong>ko PA, Sitar DS, Aoki FY, Montgomery PR. Drug-Associated Hospital<br />

Admissions In Ol<strong>de</strong>r Medical Pati<strong>en</strong>ts. Journal Of The American Geriatrics Society.<br />

1988;36(12):1092-8.<br />

47. Rochon PA, Gurwitz JH. Optimis<strong>in</strong>g drug treatm<strong>en</strong>t for el<strong>de</strong>rly people: the prescrib<strong>in</strong>g casca<strong>de</strong>.<br />

BMJ. 1997;315(7115):1096-9.<br />

48. Beers MH. Explicit criteria for <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g pot<strong>en</strong>tially <strong>in</strong>appropriate medication use by the<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly - An update. Archives Of Internal Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 1997;157(14):1531-6.<br />

49. Hanlon JT, Schma<strong>de</strong>r KE, Ruby CM, We<strong>in</strong>berger M. Suboptimal prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> ol<strong>de</strong>r <strong>in</strong>pati<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

and outpati<strong>en</strong>ts. Journal Of The American Geriatrics Society. 2001;49(2):200-9.<br />

50. Gre<strong>en</strong>wald BS, Krem<strong>en</strong> N, Aupperle P. Tailor<strong>in</strong>g adult psychiatric practices to the field of<br />

geriatrics. The Psychiatric Quarterly. 1992;63(4):343-66.<br />

51. Lipton HL, Bero LA, Bird JA, McPhee SJ. Un<strong>de</strong>rmedication Among Geriatric Outpati<strong>en</strong>ts:<br />

Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial. In: Rowe J, Ahronheim J, Lawton P, editors. Annual<br />

Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics; 1992. p. 95-108.<br />

52. Simon SR, Gurwitz JH. Drug therapy <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly: Improv<strong>in</strong>g quality and access. Cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

Pharmacology & Therapeutics. 2003;73(5):387-93.<br />

53. Hallas J, Harvald B, Gram LF, Grodum E, Bros<strong>en</strong> K, Haghfelt T, et al. Drug Related Hospital<br />

Admissions - The Role Of Def<strong>in</strong>itions And Int<strong>en</strong>sity Of Data-Collection, And The Possibility Of<br />

Prev<strong>en</strong>tion. Journal Of Internal Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 1990;228(2):83-90.<br />

54. Hallas J, Worm J, Beckniels<strong>en</strong> J, Gram LF, Grodum E, Damsbo N, et al. Drug Related Ev<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

And Drug Utilization In Pati<strong>en</strong>ts Admitted To A Geriatric Hospital Departm<strong>en</strong>t. Danish<br />

Medical Bullet<strong>in</strong>. 1991;38(5):417-22.


112 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

55. L<strong>in</strong>dley CM, Tully MP, Paramsothy V, Tallis RC. Inappropriate Medication Is A Major Cause Of<br />

Adverse Drug-Reactions In El<strong>de</strong>rly Pati<strong>en</strong>ts. Age And Age<strong>in</strong>g. 1992;21(4):294-300.<br />

56. Hallas J, Harvald B, Worm J, Beckniels<strong>en</strong> J, Gram LF, Grodum E, et al. Drug-Related Hospital<br />

Admissions - Results From An Interv<strong>en</strong>tion Program. European Journal Of Cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

Pharmacology. 1993;45(3):199-203.<br />

57. Courtman BJ, Stall<strong>in</strong>gs SB. Characterization of drug-related problems <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts on<br />

admission to a medical ward. The Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy. 1995;48(3):161-6.<br />

58. Nelson KM, Talbert RL. Drug-related hospital admissions. Pharmacotherapy. 1996;16(4):701-7.<br />

59. Cunn<strong>in</strong>gham G, Dodd TRP, Grant DJ, McMurdo MET, Richards RME. Drug-related problems <strong>in</strong><br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts admitted to Taysi<strong>de</strong> hospitals, methods for prev<strong>en</strong>tion and subsequ<strong>en</strong>t<br />

reassessm<strong>en</strong>t. Age And Age<strong>in</strong>g. 1997;26(5):375-82.<br />

60. Mannesse CK, Derkx FHM, <strong>de</strong> Rid<strong>de</strong>r MAJ, t Veld A, van <strong>de</strong>r Camm<strong>en</strong> TJM. Contribution of<br />

adverse drug reactions to hospital admission of ol<strong>de</strong>r pati<strong>en</strong>ts. Age And Age<strong>in</strong>g. 2000;29(1):35-<br />

9.<br />

61. Chan M, Nicklason F, Vial JH. Adverse drug ev<strong>en</strong>ts as a cause of hospital admission <strong>in</strong> the<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly. Internal Medic<strong>in</strong>e Journal. 2001;31(4):199-205.<br />

62. Hohl CM, Dankoff J, Colacone A, Afilalo M. Polypharmacy, adverse drug-related ev<strong>en</strong>ts, and<br />

pot<strong>en</strong>tial adverse drug <strong>in</strong>teractions <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts pres<strong>en</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g to an emerg<strong>en</strong>cy <strong>de</strong>partm<strong>en</strong>t.<br />

Annals Of Emerg<strong>en</strong>cy Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 2001;38(6):666-71.<br />

63. Beijer HJM, <strong>de</strong> Blaey CJ. Hospitalisations caused by adverse drug reactions (ADR): a metaanalysis<br />

of observational studies. Pharmacy World & Sci<strong>en</strong>ce. 2002;24(2):46-54.<br />

64. Beers MH, Ouslan<strong>de</strong>r JG, Roll<strong>in</strong>gher I, Reub<strong>en</strong> DB, Brooks J, Beck JC. Explicit Criteria For<br />

Determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g Inappropriate Medication Use In Nurs<strong>in</strong>g-Home Resi<strong>de</strong>nts. Archives Of Internal<br />

Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 1991;151(9):1825-32.<br />

65. Seymour RM, Routledge PA. Important drug-drug <strong>in</strong>teractions <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly. Drugs & Ag<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

1998;12(6):485-94.<br />

66. Aparasu RR, Mort JR. Inappropriate prescrib<strong>in</strong>g for the el<strong>de</strong>rly: Beers criteria-based review.<br />

Annals Of Pharmacotherapy. 2000;34(3):338-46.<br />

67. Hanlon JT, Shimp LA, Semla TP. Rec<strong>en</strong>t advances <strong>in</strong> geriatrics: Drug-related problems <strong>in</strong> the<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly. Annals Of Pharmacotherapy. 2000;34(3):360-5.<br />

68. Elliott RA, Woodward MC, Oborne CA. Indicators of prescib<strong>in</strong>g quality for el<strong>de</strong>rly hospital<br />

<strong>in</strong>pati<strong>en</strong>ts. The Australian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy. 2001;31(1):19-25.<br />

69. Zhan C, Sangl J, Bierman AS, Miller MR, Friedman B, Wickizer SW, et al. Pot<strong>en</strong>tially<br />

<strong>in</strong>appropriate medication use <strong>in</strong> the community-dwell<strong>in</strong>g el<strong>de</strong>rly: f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs from the 1996<br />

Medical Exp<strong>en</strong>diture Panel Survey. JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association.<br />

2001;286(22):2823-9.<br />

70. M<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>lson D, Ramchand R, Abramson R, Tuml<strong>in</strong>son A. Prescription drugs <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes:<br />

manag<strong>in</strong>g costs and quality <strong>in</strong> a complex <strong>en</strong>vironm<strong>en</strong>t. NHPF Issue Brief. 2002;784:1-18.<br />

71. Avery AJ, Groom LM, Brown KP, Thornhill K. The impact of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home pati<strong>en</strong>ts on<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g costs <strong>in</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eral practice. J Cl<strong>in</strong> Pharm Ther. 1999;24(5):357-63.<br />

72. O'Neill C, Groom LM, Boot D, Thornhill K. Expla<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g variations <strong>in</strong> prescrib<strong>in</strong>g costs: results<br />

from a comparison of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home pati<strong>en</strong>ts with matched pairs liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the community. J Cl<strong>in</strong><br />

Pharm Ther. 1999;24(6):427-32.<br />

73. An<strong>de</strong>rs<strong>en</strong> M. Is it possible to measure prescrib<strong>in</strong>g quality us<strong>in</strong>g only prescription data? Basic &<br />

Cl<strong>in</strong>ical Pharmacology & Toxicology. 2006;98(3):314-9.<br />

74. Fick DM, Cooper JW, Wa<strong>de</strong> WE, Waller JL, Maclean JR, Beers MH. Updat<strong>in</strong>g the Beers criteria<br />

for pot<strong>en</strong>tially <strong>in</strong>appropriate medication use <strong>in</strong> ol<strong>de</strong>r adults: results of a US cons<strong>en</strong>sus panel of<br />

experts. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163(22):2716-24.<br />

75. Hanlon JT, Artz MB, Pieper CF, L<strong>in</strong>dblad CI, Sloane RJ, Ruby CM, et al. Inappropriate<br />

medication use among frail el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong>pati<strong>en</strong>ts. Ann Pharmacother. 2004;38(1):9-14.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 113<br />

76. Nygaard HA, Naik M, Ruths S, Straand J. Nurs<strong>in</strong>g-home resi<strong>de</strong>nts and their drug use: a<br />

comparison betwe<strong>en</strong> m<strong>en</strong>tally <strong>in</strong>tact and m<strong>en</strong>tally impaired resi<strong>de</strong>nts - The Berg<strong>en</strong> District<br />

Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Home (BEDNURS) study. European Journal Of Cl<strong>in</strong>ical Pharmacology. 2003;59(5-<br />

6):463-9.<br />

77. W<strong>en</strong>ger NS, Shekelle PG. Assess<strong>in</strong>g Care of Vulnerable El<strong>de</strong>rs: ACOVE project overview.<br />

Annals Of Internal Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 2001;135(8):642-6.<br />

78. Knight EL, Avorn J. Quality <strong>in</strong>dicators for appropriate medication use <strong>in</strong> vulnerable el<strong>de</strong>rs.<br />

Annals Of Internal Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 2001;135(8):703-10.<br />

79. Oborne CA, Hooper R, Swift CG, Jackson SHD. Explicit, evi<strong>de</strong>nce-based criteria to assess the<br />

quality of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g to el<strong>de</strong>rly nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts. Age And Age<strong>in</strong>g. 2003;32(1):102-8.<br />

80. Bernabei R, Gambassi G, Lapane K, Landi F, Gatsonis C, Dunlop R, et al. Managem<strong>en</strong>t of pa<strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts with cancer. SAGE Study Group. Systematic Assessm<strong>en</strong>t of Geriatric Drug<br />

Use via Epi<strong>de</strong>miology. JAMA. 1998;279(23):1877-82.<br />

81. Gambassi G, Landi F, P<strong>en</strong>g L, Brostrup-J<strong>en</strong>s<strong>en</strong> C, Calore K, Hiris J, et al. Validity of diagnostic<br />

and drug data <strong>in</strong> standardized nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nt assessm<strong>en</strong>ts: pot<strong>en</strong>tial for geriatric<br />

pharmacoepi<strong>de</strong>miology. SAGE Study Group. Systematic Assessm<strong>en</strong>t of Geriatric drug use via<br />

Epi<strong>de</strong>miology. Med Care. 1998;36(2):167-79.<br />

82. Ray WA, Fe<strong>de</strong>rspiel CF, Schaffner W. A Study Of Antipsychotic Drug-Use In Nurs<strong>in</strong>g-Homes -<br />

Epi<strong>de</strong>miologic Evi<strong>de</strong>nce Suggest<strong>in</strong>g Misuse. American Journal Of Public Health. 1980;70(5):485-<br />

91.<br />

83. Buck JA. Psychotropic-Drug Practice In Nurs<strong>in</strong>g-Homes. Journal Of The American Geriatrics<br />

Society. 1988;36(5):409-18.<br />

84. Garrard J, Makris L, Dunham T, Heston LL, Cooper S, Ratner ER, et al. Evaluation Of<br />

Neuroleptic Drug-Use By Nurs<strong>in</strong>g-Home El<strong>de</strong>rly Un<strong>de</strong>r Proposed Medicare And Medicaid<br />

Regulations. Jama-Journal Of The American Medical Association. 1991;265(4):463-7.<br />

85. Garrard J, Ch<strong>en</strong> V, Dowd B. The Impact Of The 1987 Fe<strong>de</strong>ral-Regulations On The Use Of<br />

Psychotropic-Drugs In M<strong>in</strong>nesota Nurs<strong>in</strong>g-Homes. American Journal Of Public Health.<br />

1995;85(6):771-6.<br />

86. Schmidt IK, Claesson CB, Westerholm B, Nilsson LG. Physician and staff assessm<strong>en</strong>ts of drug<br />

<strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tions and outcomes <strong>in</strong> Swedish nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. Annals Of Pharmacotherapy.<br />

1998;32(1):27-32.<br />

87. Mylotte JM, Keagle J. B<strong>en</strong>chmarks for antibiotic use and cost <strong>in</strong> long-term care. Journal Of The<br />

American Geriatrics Society. 2005;53(7):1117-22.<br />

88. Shorr RI, Fought RL, Ray WA. Changes In Antipsychotic Drug-Use In Nurs<strong>in</strong>g-Homes Dur<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Implem<strong>en</strong>tation Of The Obra-87 Regulations. Jama-Journal Of The American Medical<br />

Association. 1994;271(5):358-62.<br />

89. Svarstad BL, Mount JK. Nurs<strong>in</strong>g-Home Resources And Tranquilizer Use Among The<br />

Institutionalized El<strong>de</strong>rly. Journal Of The American Geriatrics Society. 1991;39(9):869-75.<br />

90. Mull<strong>in</strong>s LC, Hartley TM. Resi<strong>de</strong>nts' autonomy: nurs<strong>in</strong>g home personnel's perceptions. Journal<br />

Of Gerontologic Nurs<strong>in</strong>g. 2002;28(2):35-44.<br />

91. Castle NG, Engberg J. Staff turnover and quality of care <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. Medical Care.<br />

2005;43(6):616-26.<br />

92. Shortell SM, Obri<strong>en</strong> JL, Carman JM, Foster RW, Hughes EFX, Boerstler H, et al. Assess<strong>in</strong>g The<br />

Impact Of Cont<strong>in</strong>uous-Quality-Improvem<strong>en</strong>t Total-Quality-Managem<strong>en</strong>t - Concept Versus<br />

Implem<strong>en</strong>tation. Health Services Research. 1995;30(2):377-401.<br />

93. Holtkamp CCM, Kerkstra A, Ribbe MW, van Camp<strong>en</strong> C, Ooms ME. The relation betwe<strong>en</strong><br />

quality of co-ord<strong>in</strong>ation of nurs<strong>in</strong>g care and quality of life <strong>in</strong> Dutch nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. Journal Of<br />

Advanced Nurs<strong>in</strong>g. 2000;32(6):1364-73.<br />

94. Wagner C, van <strong>de</strong>r Wal G, Gro<strong>en</strong>eweg<strong>en</strong> PP, <strong>de</strong> Bakker DH. The effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess of quality<br />

systems <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes: a review. Quality <strong>in</strong> Health Care. 2001;10(4):211-7.


114 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

95. Scott-Cawiezell J. Are nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes ready to create susta<strong>in</strong>able improvem<strong>en</strong>t? J Nurs Care<br />

Qual. 2005;20(3):203-7.<br />

96. Saliba D, Schnelle JF. Indicators of the quality of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care. Journal Of The<br />

American Geriatrics Society. 2002;50(8):1421-30.<br />

97. Wipke-Tevis DD, Williams DA, Rantz MJ, Popejoy LL, Mads<strong>en</strong> RW, Petroski GF, et al. Nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

home quality and pressure ulcer prev<strong>en</strong>tion and managem<strong>en</strong>t practices. Journal Of The<br />

American Geriatrics Society. 2004;52(4):583-8.<br />

98. Bates-J<strong>en</strong>s<strong>en</strong> BM, Alessi CA, Cadogan M, Levy-Storms L, Jorge J, Yoshii J, et al. The m<strong>in</strong>imum<br />

data set bedfast quality <strong>in</strong>dicator: Differ<strong>en</strong>ces among nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Research.<br />

2004;53(4):260-72.<br />

99. Wagner C, van Mero<strong>de</strong> GG, van Oort M. Costs of quality managem<strong>en</strong>t systems <strong>in</strong> long-term<br />

care organizations: an exploration. Qual Manag Health Care. 2003;12(2):106-14.<br />

100. Lee RH, Bott MJ, Forbes S, Redford L, Swagerty DL, Taunton RL. Process-based cost<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Journal Of Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Care Quality. 2003;18(4):259-66.<br />

101. Grabowski DC, Angelelli JJ. The relationship of medicaid paym<strong>en</strong>t rates, bed constra<strong>in</strong>t<br />

policies, and risk-adjusted pressure ulcers. Health Services Research. 2004;39(4):793-812.<br />

102. Czubak R, Tucker J, Zarowitz BJ. Optimiz<strong>in</strong>g drug prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> managed care populations -<br />

Improv<strong>in</strong>g cl<strong>in</strong>ical and economic outcomes. Disease Managem<strong>en</strong>t & Health Outcomes.<br />

2004;12(3):147-67.<br />

103. Bab<strong>in</strong>gton MA. Use of a geriatric formulary <strong>in</strong> long-term care. medical <strong>in</strong>terface. 1997:87-9.<br />

104. Gross DJ. Prescription drug formularies <strong>in</strong> managed care: concerns for the el<strong>de</strong>rly population.<br />

Cl<strong>in</strong>ical Therapeutics. 1998;20(6):1277-91.<br />

105. Gurwitz JH, Field TS, Avorn J, McCormick D, Ja<strong>in</strong> S, Eckler M, et al. Inci<strong>de</strong>nce and<br />

prev<strong>en</strong>tability of adverse drug ev<strong>en</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. American Journal Of Medic<strong>in</strong>e.<br />

2000;109(2):87-94.<br />

106. Gurwitz JH, Field TS, Judge J, Rochon P, Harrold LR, Cadoret C, et al. The <strong>in</strong>ci<strong>de</strong>nce of<br />

adverse drug ev<strong>en</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> two large aca<strong>de</strong>mic long-term care facilities. American Journal Of<br />

Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 2005;118(3):251-8.<br />

107. Fischbach MS, Gold JL, Lee M, Dergal JM, Litner GM, Rochon PA. Pill-splitt<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a long-term<br />

care facility. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 2001;164(6):785-6.<br />

108. Paradiso LM, Roughead EE, Gilbert AL, Cosh D, Nation RL, Barnes L, et al. Crush<strong>in</strong>g or<br />

alter<strong>in</strong>g medications: what's happ<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial aged-care facilities? Australasian Journal on<br />

Age<strong>in</strong>g. 2002;21(3):123-7.<br />

109. Roughead EE, Semple SJ, Gilbert AL. Quality use of medic<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong> aged-care facilities <strong>in</strong> Australia.<br />

Drugs & Ag<strong>in</strong>g. 2003;20(9):643-53.<br />

110. Kirkevold O, Engedal K. Concealm<strong>en</strong>t of drugs <strong>in</strong> food and beverages <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes: cross<br />

sectional study. British Medical Journal. 2005;330(7481):20-2A.<br />

111. Flynn K. Tablet splitt<strong>in</strong>g. VA Technology Assessm<strong>en</strong>t Program Short Report. 2000:1-8.<br />

112. McDevitt JT, Gurst AH, Ch<strong>en</strong> YS. Accuracy of tablet splitt<strong>in</strong>g. Pharmacotherapy.<br />

1998;18(1):193-7.<br />

113. Peek BT, Al-Achi A, Coombs SJ. Accuracy of tablet splitt<strong>in</strong>g by el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts. Journal Of The<br />

American Medical Association. 2002;288(4):451-2.<br />

114. Marriott JL, Nation RL. Splitt<strong>in</strong>g tablets. Australian Prescriber. 2002;25(6):133-5.<br />

115. Treloar A, Philpot M, Beats B. Conceal<strong>in</strong>g medication <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts' food. Lancet. 2001;357:62-4.<br />

116. Honkan<strong>en</strong> L. No: Covert medication is paternalistic. Western Journal Of Medic<strong>in</strong>e.<br />

2001;174(4):229-.<br />

117. Wong JGWS, Poon Y, Hui EC. "I can put the medic<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong> his soup, Doctor'". Journal of Medical<br />

Ethics. 2005;31:262-5.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 115<br />

118. Ramsay S. UK nurses receive guidance on covert medication of pati<strong>en</strong>ts. Lancet.<br />

2001;358(9285):900-.<br />

119. V<strong>en</strong>ot A. Electronic prescrib<strong>in</strong>g for the el<strong>de</strong>rly - Will it improve medication usage? Drugs &<br />

Ag<strong>in</strong>g. 1999;15(2):77-80.<br />

120. Kaushal R, Shojania KG, Bates DW. Effects of computerized physician or<strong>de</strong>r <strong>en</strong>try and cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

<strong>de</strong>cision support systems on medication safety - A systematic review. Archives Of Internal<br />

Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 2003;163(12):1409-16.<br />

121. Rochon PA, Field TS, Bates DW, Lee M, Gav<strong>en</strong>do L, Erramuspe-Ma<strong>in</strong>ard J, et al. Computerized<br />

physician or<strong>de</strong>r <strong>en</strong>try with cl<strong>in</strong>ical <strong>de</strong>cision support <strong>in</strong> the long-term care sett<strong>in</strong>g: <strong>in</strong>sights from<br />

the Baycrest C<strong>en</strong>tre for Geriatric Care. Journal Of The American Geriatrics Society.<br />

2005;53:1780-9.<br />

122. Bates DW, Coh<strong>en</strong> M, Leape LL, Overhage JM, Shabot MM, Sheridan T. Reduc<strong>in</strong>g the frequ<strong>en</strong>cy<br />

of errors <strong>in</strong> medic<strong>in</strong>e us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation technology. Journal Of The American Medical<br />

Informatics Association. 2001;8(4):299-308.<br />

123. Bates DW, Evans RS, Murff H, Stetson PD, Pizziferri L, Hripcsak G. Detect<strong>in</strong>g adverse ev<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation technology. Journal Of The American Medical Informatics Association.<br />

2003;10(2):115-28.<br />

124. Gurwitz JH. Polypharmacy - A new paradigm for quality drug therapy <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly? Archives<br />

Of Internal Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 2004;164(18):1957-9.<br />

125. Koppel R, Metlay JP, Coh<strong>en</strong> A, Abaluck B, Localio AR, Kimmel SE, et al. Role of computerized<br />

physician or<strong>de</strong>r <strong>en</strong>try systems <strong>in</strong> facilitat<strong>in</strong>g medication errors. Jama-Journal Of The American<br />

Medical Association. 2005;293(10):1197-203.<br />

126. We<strong>in</strong>er M, Callahan CM, Tierney WM, Overhage JM, Maml<strong>in</strong> B, Dexter PR, et al. Us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation technology to improve the health care of ol<strong>de</strong>r adults. Annals Of Internal<br />

Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 2003;139(5):430-6.<br />

127. Nebeker JR, Hoffman JM, Weir CR, B<strong>en</strong>nett CL, Hurdle JF. High rates of adverse drug ev<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

<strong>in</strong> a highly computerized hospital. Archives Of Internal Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 2005;165(10):1111-6.<br />

128. Boll<strong>en</strong> C, Warr<strong>en</strong> J, Wh<strong>en</strong>an G. Introduction of electronic prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> an aged care facility.<br />

Australian Family Physician. 2005;34(4):283-6.<br />

129. Rochon PA, Field TS, Bates DW, Lee M, Gav<strong>en</strong>do L, Ma<strong>in</strong>ard JE, et al. Cl<strong>in</strong>ical application of a<br />

computerized system for physician or<strong>de</strong>r <strong>en</strong>try with cl<strong>in</strong>ical <strong>de</strong>cision support to prev<strong>en</strong>t<br />

adverse drug ev<strong>en</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> long-term care. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 2006;174(1):52-4.<br />

130. Bell DS, Cret<strong>in</strong> S, Mark<strong>en</strong> RS, Landman AB. A conceptual framework for evaluat<strong>in</strong>g outpati<strong>en</strong>t<br />

electronic prescrib<strong>in</strong>g systems based on their functional capabilities. Journal Of The American<br />

Medical Informatics Association. 2004;11(1):60-70.<br />

131. Laucka PV, Hoffman NB. Decreas<strong>in</strong>g Medication Use In A Nurs<strong>in</strong>g-Home Pati<strong>en</strong>t-Care Unit.<br />

American Journal Of Hospital Pharmacy. 1992;49(1):96-9.<br />

132. Bates DW, Gawan<strong>de</strong> AA. Improv<strong>in</strong>g safety with <strong>in</strong>formation technology. New England Journal<br />

Of Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 2003;348(25):2526-34.<br />

133. L<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r<strong>in</strong>k BW, Egberts TCG. Clos<strong>in</strong>g the loop of the medication use process us<strong>in</strong>g electronic<br />

medication adm<strong>in</strong>istration registration. Pharmacy World & Sci<strong>en</strong>ce. 2004;26(4):185-90.<br />

134. Pharmacists ASoH. ASHP statem<strong>en</strong>t on pharmaceutical care. American Journal Of Hospital<br />

Pharmacy. 1993;50:1720-3.<br />

135. Cooper JW. Effect of <strong>in</strong>itiation, term<strong>in</strong>ation and re<strong>in</strong>itiation of consultant cl<strong>in</strong>ical pharmacist<br />

services <strong>in</strong> a geriatric long-term care facility. Medical Care. 1985;23(1):84-8.<br />

136. Furniss L, Craig SKL, Burns A. Medication use <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes for el<strong>de</strong>rly people.<br />

International Journal Of Geriatric Psychiatry. 1998;13(7):433-9.<br />

137. Furniss L. Use of medic<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes for ol<strong>de</strong>r people. Advances <strong>in</strong> Psychiatric<br />

Treatm<strong>en</strong>t. 2002;8:198 - 204.


116 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

138. D<strong>en</strong>ham MJ, Barnett LB. Drug therapy and the ol<strong>de</strong>r person - Role of the pharmacist. Drug<br />

Safety. 1998;19(4):243-50.<br />

139. Crotty M, Rowett D, Spurl<strong>in</strong>g L, Giles L, Philips PA. Does the addition of a pharmacist<br />

transition coord<strong>in</strong>ator improve evi<strong>de</strong>nce-based medication managem<strong>en</strong>t and health outcomes<br />

<strong>in</strong> ol<strong>de</strong>r adults mov<strong>in</strong>g from the hospital to a long-term care facility? Results of a randomized,<br />

controlled trial. The American Journal of Geriatric Pharmacotherapy. 2004;2(4):257-64.<br />

140. Hanlon JT, We<strong>in</strong>berger M, Samsa GP, Schma<strong>de</strong>r KE, Uttech KM, Lewis IK, et al. A randomized,<br />

controlled trial of a cl<strong>in</strong>ical pharmacist <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion to improve <strong>in</strong>appropriate prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly outpati<strong>en</strong>ts with polypharmacy. American Journal Of Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 1996;100(4):428-37.<br />

141. Furniss L, Burns A, Craig SKL, Scobie S, Cooke J, Faragher B. Effects of a pharmacist's<br />

medication review <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes - Randomised controlled trial. British Journal Of<br />

Psychiatry. 2000;176:563-7.<br />

142. Klepp<strong>in</strong>g G. Medication review <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly care homes. Primary Care Pharmacy. 2000;1(4):105-<br />

8.<br />

143. Roberts MS, Stokes JA, K<strong>in</strong>g MA, Lynne TA, Purdie DM, Glasziou PP, et al. Outcomes of a<br />

randomized controlled trial of a cl<strong>in</strong>ical pharmacy <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion <strong>in</strong> 52 nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. British<br />

Journal Of Cl<strong>in</strong>ical Pharmacology. 2001;51(3):257-65.<br />

144. Christ<strong>en</strong>s<strong>en</strong> D, Trygstad T, Sullivan R, Garmise J, Wegner SE. A pharmacy managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

<strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion for optimiz<strong>in</strong>g drug therapy for nurs<strong>in</strong>g home pati<strong>en</strong>ts. The American Journal of<br />

Geriatric Pharmacotherapy. 2004;2(4):248-56.<br />

145. Majumdar SR, Soumerai SB. Why most <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tions to improve physician prescrib<strong>in</strong>g do not<br />

seem to work. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 2003;169(1):30-1.<br />

146. Harjivan C, Lyles A. Improved medication use <strong>in</strong> long-term care: Build<strong>in</strong>g on the consultant<br />

pharmacist's drug regim<strong>en</strong> review. American Journal Of Managed Care. 2002;8(4):318-26.<br />

147. Sellors J, Kaczorowski J, Sellors C, Dolovich L, Woodward C, Willan A, et al. A randomized<br />

controlled trial of a pharmacist consultation program for family physicians and their el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 2003;169(1):17-22.<br />

148. Crotty M, Whitehead C, Rowett D, Halbert J, Weller D, F<strong>in</strong>ucane P, et al. An outreach<br />

<strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion to implem<strong>en</strong>t evi<strong>de</strong>nce based practice <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care: a randomized controlled<br />

trial [ISRCTN67855475]. Bmc Health Services Research. 2004;4.<br />

149. Briesacher B, Limcangco R, Simoni-Wastila L, Doshi J, Gurwitz J. Evaluation of nationally<br />

mandated drug use reviews to improve pati<strong>en</strong>t safety <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes: A natural experim<strong>en</strong>t.<br />

Journal Of The American Geriatrics Society. 2005;53(6):991-6.<br />

150. Mamun K, Li<strong>en</strong> CTC, Goh-Tan CYE, Ang WST. Polypharmacy and <strong>in</strong>appropriate medication<br />

use <strong>in</strong> S<strong>in</strong>gapore nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. Annals Aca<strong>de</strong>my Of Medic<strong>in</strong>e S<strong>in</strong>gapore. 2004;33(1):49-52.<br />

151. Avorn J. Polypharmacy - A new paradigm for quality drug therapy <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly? Archives Of<br />

Internal Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 2004;164:1957-9.<br />

152. Schmidt IK, Svarstad BL. Nurse-physician communication and quality of drug use <strong>in</strong> Swedish<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes. Social Sci<strong>en</strong>ce & Medic<strong>in</strong>e. 2002;54(12):1767-77.<br />

153. Midlov P, Bon<strong>de</strong>sson A, Eriksson T, Petersson J, M<strong>in</strong>thon L, Hoglund P. Descriptive study and<br />

pharmacotherapeutic <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tion <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts with epilepsy or Park<strong>in</strong>son's disease at nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

homes <strong>in</strong> southern Swe<strong>de</strong>n. European Journal Of Cl<strong>in</strong>ical Pharmacology. 2002;57:903-10.<br />

154. Jeffery S, Ruby S, Twersky J, Hanlon JT. Effect of an <strong>in</strong>terdiscipl<strong>in</strong>ary team on suboptimal<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a long-term care facility. The Consultant Pharmacist. 1999(14):1386-91.<br />

155. K<strong>in</strong>g MA, Roberts MS. Multidiscipl<strong>in</strong>ary case confer<strong>en</strong>ce reviews: improv<strong>in</strong>g outcomes for<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts, carers and health professionals. Pharmacy World & Sci<strong>en</strong>ce.<br />

2001;23(2):41-5.<br />

156. Bon<strong>de</strong>sson A, Midlov P, Eriksson T, Hoglund P. Pharmacotherapeutic <strong>in</strong>terv<strong>en</strong>tions by a multispeciality<br />

team: op<strong>in</strong>ions of the g<strong>en</strong>eral practitioners and nurses. European Journal Of Cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

Pharmacology. 2003;59(1):65-9.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 117<br />

157. Cheek J, Gilbert A, Ballantyne A, P<strong>en</strong>hall R. Factors <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>c<strong>in</strong>g the implem<strong>en</strong>tation of quality<br />

use of medic<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial aged care. Drugs & Ag<strong>in</strong>g. 2004;21(12):813-24.<br />

158. Crotty M, Halbert J, Rowett D, Giles L, Birks R, Williams H, et al. An outreach geriatric<br />

medication advisory service <strong>in</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>ntial aged care: a randomised controlled trial of case<br />

confer<strong>en</strong>c<strong>in</strong>g. Age And Age<strong>in</strong>g. 2004;33(6):612-7.<br />

159. Svarstad BL, Mount JK, Bigelow W. Variations <strong>in</strong> the treatm<strong>en</strong>t culture of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes and<br />

responses to regulations to reduce drug use. Psychiatric Services. 2001;52(5):666-72.<br />

160. Manias E, Aitk<strong>en</strong> R, Dunn<strong>in</strong>g T. How graduate nurses use protocols to manage pati<strong>en</strong>ts'<br />

medications. Journal Of Cl<strong>in</strong>ical Nurs<strong>in</strong>g. 2005;14(8):935-44.<br />

161. Ostrowski J, Resag K. Pharmacok<strong>in</strong>etics of molsidom<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong> humans. Am Heart J. 1985;109(3 Pt<br />

2):641-3.<br />

162. Ros<strong>en</strong>kranz B, W<strong>in</strong>kelmann BR, Parnham MJ. Cl<strong>in</strong>ical pharmacok<strong>in</strong>etics of molsidom<strong>in</strong>e. Cl<strong>in</strong><br />

Pharmacok<strong>in</strong>et. 1996;30(5):372-84.<br />

163. Wohrle J, Nusser T, Hoffmeister A, Kestler HA, Grebe OC, Hoher M, et al. [Effect of<br />

molsidom<strong>in</strong>e on rheological parameters and the <strong>in</strong>ci<strong>de</strong>nce of cardiovascular ev<strong>en</strong>ts]. Dtsch<br />

Med Woch<strong>en</strong>schr. 2003;128(24):1333-7.<br />

164. BCFI. Transparantiefiche "Aanpak van stabiele angor". 2004 September.<br />

165. Fox K, Garcia MAA, Ardiss<strong>in</strong>o D, Buszman P, Camici PG, Crea F, et al. Gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es on the<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t of stable ang<strong>in</strong>a pectoris: executive summary: the Task Force on the Managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

of Stable Ang<strong>in</strong>a Pectoris of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J.<br />

2006;27(11):1341-81.<br />

166. Mess<strong>in</strong> R, Opolski G, F<strong>en</strong>yvesi T, Carreer-Bruhwyler F, Dubois C, Famaey J-P, et al. Efficacy<br />

and safety of molsidom<strong>in</strong>e once-a-day <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts with stable ang<strong>in</strong>a pectoris. Int J Cardiol.<br />

2005;98(1):79-89.<br />

167. NRKP/CNPQ;c 2005.Feedbackrapport 19-05-05. Available from:<br />

http://riziv.fgov.be/care/nl/doctors/promotion-quality/feedbackantihypert<strong>en</strong>seurs/pdf/Boodschapp<strong>en</strong>-feedback-AHT_Spec-N.pdf<br />

168. Lee PE, Gill SS, Freedman M, Bronskill SE, Hillmer MP, Rochon PA. Atypical antipsychotic drugs<br />

<strong>in</strong> the treatm<strong>en</strong>t of behavioural and psychological symptoms of <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia: systematic review.<br />

BMJ. 2004;329(7457):75.<br />

169. Schnei<strong>de</strong>r LS, Dagerman K, Insel PS. Efficacy and adverse effects of atypical antipsychotics for<br />

<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia: meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry.<br />

2006;14(3):191-210.<br />

170. Schnei<strong>de</strong>r LS, Tariot PN, Dagerman KS, Davis SM, Hsiao JK, Ismail MS, et al. Effectiv<strong>en</strong>ess of<br />

atypical antipsychotic drugs <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts with Alzheimer's disease. N Engl J Med.<br />

2006;355(15):1525-38.<br />

171. Kaduszkiewicz H, Zimmermann T, Beck-Bornholdt H-P, van <strong>de</strong>n Bussche H. Chol<strong>in</strong>esterase<br />

<strong>in</strong>hibitors for pati<strong>en</strong>ts with Alzheimer's disease: systematic review of randomised cl<strong>in</strong>ical trials.<br />

BMJ. 2005;331(7512):321-7.<br />

172. Birks J. Chol<strong>in</strong>esterase <strong>in</strong>hibitors for Alzheimer's disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.<br />

2006(1):CD005593.<br />

173. Birks J, Harvey RJ. Donepezil for <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia due to Alzheimer's disease. Cochrane Database Syst<br />

Rev. 2006(1):CD001190.<br />

174. Birks J, Flicker L. Donepezil for mild cognitive impairm<strong>en</strong>t. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.<br />

2006;3:CD006104.<br />

175. Loveman E, Gre<strong>en</strong> C, Kirby J, Takeda A, Picot J, Payne E, et al. The cl<strong>in</strong>ical and costeffectiv<strong>en</strong>ess<br />

of donepezil, rivastigm<strong>in</strong>e, galantam<strong>in</strong>e and memant<strong>in</strong>e for Alzheimer's disease.<br />

Health Technol Assess. 2006;10(1):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-160.<br />

176. Birks J, Grimley EV, Van Dong<strong>en</strong> M. G<strong>in</strong>kgo biloba for cognitive impairm<strong>en</strong>t and <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia.<br />

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002(4):CD003120.


118 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

177. Beier MT. Harmless herbs? Th<strong>in</strong>k aga<strong>in</strong>: merits of a complete medication history. J Am Med Dir<br />

Assoc. 2006;7(7):446-7.<br />

178. Poole PJ, Black PN. Mucolytic ag<strong>en</strong>ts for chronic bronchitis or chronic obstructive pulmonary<br />

disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003(2):CD001287.<br />

179. BCFI. Mucolytica bij COPD. Folia. 2005 April.<br />

180. Decramer M, Rutt<strong>en</strong>-van Molk<strong>en</strong> M, Dekhuijz<strong>en</strong> PNR, Troosters T, van Herwaar<strong>de</strong>n C,<br />

Pellegr<strong>in</strong>o R, et al. Effects of N-acetylcyste<strong>in</strong>e on outcomes <strong>in</strong> chronic obstructive pulmonary<br />

disease (Bronchitis Randomized on NAC Cost-Utility Study, BRONCUS): a randomised<br />

placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;365(9470):1552-60.<br />

181. Bhatt DL, Fox KAA, Hacke W, Berger PB, Black HR, Bo<strong>de</strong>n WE, et al. Clopidogrel and aspir<strong>in</strong><br />

versus aspir<strong>in</strong> alone for the prev<strong>en</strong>tion of atherothrombotic ev<strong>en</strong>ts. N Engl J Med.<br />

2006;354(16):1706-17.<br />

182. Hallas J, Dall M, Andries A, An<strong>de</strong>rs<strong>en</strong> BS, Aalykke C, Hans<strong>en</strong> JM, et al. Use of s<strong>in</strong>gle and<br />

comb<strong>in</strong>ed antithrombotic therapy and risk of serious upper gastro<strong>in</strong>test<strong>in</strong>al bleed<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

population based case-control study. BMJ. 2006;333(7571):726.<br />

183. Randomised trial of cholesterol lower<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> 4444 pati<strong>en</strong>ts with coronary heart disease: the<br />

Scand<strong>in</strong>avian Simvastat<strong>in</strong> Survival Study (4S). Lancet. 1994;344(8934):1383-9.<br />

184. Shepherd J, Blauw GJ, Murphy MB, Boll<strong>en</strong> ELEM, Buckley BM, Cobbe SM, et al. Pravastat<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong><br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly <strong>in</strong>dividuals at risk of vascular disease (PROSPER): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet.<br />

2002;360(9346):1623-30.<br />

185. Weverl<strong>in</strong>g-Rijnsburger AW, Blauw GJ, Lagaay AM, Knook DL, Me<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>rs AE, West<strong>en</strong>dorp RG.<br />

Total cholesterol and risk of mortality <strong>in</strong> the ol<strong>de</strong>st old. Lancet. 1997;350(9085):1119-23.<br />

186. Aguilar MI, Hart R. Oral anticoagulants for prev<strong>en</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g stroke <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts with non-valvular atrial<br />

fibrillation and no previous history of stroke or transi<strong>en</strong>t ischemic attacks. Cochrane Database<br />

Syst Rev. 2005(3):CD001927.<br />

187. Lackner TE, Battis GN. Use of warfar<strong>in</strong> for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation <strong>in</strong> nurs<strong>in</strong>g home<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts. Arch Fam Med. 1995;4(12):1017-26.<br />

188. Manciet G, Albert R, Vergnes C. Indications of low-molecular-weight hepar<strong>in</strong>s <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts. Rev Gériatr. 1996;21:460-8.<br />

189. Aguilar M, Hart R. Antiplatelet therapy for prev<strong>en</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g stroke <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts with non-valvular atrial<br />

fibrillation and no previous history of stroke or transi<strong>en</strong>t ischemic attacks. Cochrane Database<br />

Syst Rev. 2005(4):CD001925.<br />

190. Chavey WE, 2nd. The importance of beta blockers <strong>in</strong> the treatm<strong>en</strong>t of heart failure. Am Fam<br />

Physician. 2000;62(11):2453-62.<br />

191. Velazquez EJ, Califf RM. All that glitters is not gold. Lancet. 2000;355(9215):1568-9.<br />

192. Angiot<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong> II receptor antagonists and heart failure: angiot<strong>en</strong>s<strong>in</strong>-convert<strong>in</strong>g-<strong>en</strong>zyme <strong>in</strong>hibitors<br />

rema<strong>in</strong> the first-l<strong>in</strong>e option. Prescrire Int. 2005;14(79):180-6.<br />

193. Weichel AS. Why ar<strong>en</strong>'t we us<strong>in</strong>g beta blockers after acute MI? Am Fam Physician.<br />

2000;62(8):1771-2.<br />

194. Solomon DH, F<strong>in</strong>kelste<strong>in</strong> JS, Katz JN, Mogun H, Avorn J. Un<strong>de</strong>ruse of osteoporosis<br />

medications <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts with fractures. Am J Med. 2003;115(5):398-400.<br />

195. Kl<strong>in</strong>ke JA, Johnson JA, Guirguis LM, Toth EL, Lee TK, Lewanczuk RZ, et al. Un<strong>de</strong>ruse of aspir<strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong> type 2 diabetes mellitus: preval<strong>en</strong>ce and correlates of therapy <strong>in</strong> rural Canada. Cl<strong>in</strong> Ther.<br />

2004;26(3):439-46.<br />

196. Wofford JL, Ett<strong>in</strong>ger WH. Risk factors and manifestations of digox<strong>in</strong> toxicity <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rly. Am<br />

J Emerg Med. 1991;9(2 Suppl 1):11-5; discussion 33-4.<br />

197. Hood WB, Jr., Dans AL, Guyatt GH, Jaeschke R, McMurray JJV. Digitalis for treatm<strong>en</strong>t of<br />

congestive heart failure <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> s<strong>in</strong>us rhythm. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.<br />

2004(2):CD002901.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 119<br />

198. Tune LE. Antichol<strong>in</strong>ergic effects of medication <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly pati<strong>en</strong>ts. J Cl<strong>in</strong> Psychiatry. 2001;62<br />

Suppl 21:11-4.<br />

199. Niwata S, Yamada Y, Ikegami N. Preval<strong>en</strong>ce of <strong>in</strong>appropriate medication us<strong>in</strong>g Beers criteria <strong>in</strong><br />

Japanese long-term care facilities. BMC Geriatr. 2006;6:1.<br />

200. Matsumoto N, I<strong>de</strong>ishi M, Sasaguri M, Nii T, Nakashima Y, Arakawa K. Effects of a slow-release<br />

nifedip<strong>in</strong>e on 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure and ischemic changes on 24-hour ambulatory<br />

electrocardiogram <strong>in</strong> pati<strong>en</strong>ts with severe coronary artery disease. Cardiology. 2000;94(1):36-<br />

43.<br />

201. Garcia Rodriguez LA, Hernan<strong>de</strong>z-Diaz S. Risk of uncomplicated peptic ulcer among users of<br />

aspir<strong>in</strong> and nonaspir<strong>in</strong> nonsteroidal anti<strong>in</strong>flammatory drugs. Am J Epi<strong>de</strong>miol. 2004;159(1):23-31.<br />

202. Petrovic M. Use and discont<strong>in</strong>uation of hypnosedative medications <strong>in</strong> geriatric <strong>in</strong>pati<strong>en</strong>ts [PhD<br />

Thesis]. G<strong>en</strong>t: Universiteit G<strong>en</strong>t; 2002.<br />

203. Passaro A, Volpato S, Romagnoni F, Manzoli N, Zuliani G, Fell<strong>in</strong> R. B<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es with<br />

differ<strong>en</strong>t half-life and fall<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a hospitalized population: The GIFA study. Gruppo Italiano di<br />

Farmacovigilanza nell'Anziano. J Cl<strong>in</strong> Epi<strong>de</strong>miol. 2000;53(12):1222-9.<br />

204. Beers M, Berkow R. The Merck Manual of Geriatrics. 3rd ed. Whitehouse Station, NJ: Merck &<br />

Co; 2000.<br />

205. L<strong>in</strong>jakumpu TA, Hartika<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong> SA, Klaukka TJ, Kopon<strong>en</strong> HJ, Hakko HH, Viilo KM, et al. Sedative<br />

drug use <strong>in</strong> the home-dwell<strong>in</strong>g el<strong>de</strong>rly. Ann Pharmacother. 2004;38(12):2017-22.<br />

206. Hosia-Ran<strong>de</strong>ll H, Pitkala K. Use of psychotropic drugs <strong>in</strong> el<strong>de</strong>rly nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts with<br />

and without <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia <strong>in</strong> Hels<strong>in</strong>ki, F<strong>in</strong>land. Drugs Ag<strong>in</strong>g. 2005;22(9):793-800.<br />

207. Alexopoulos GS, Streim J, Carp<strong>en</strong>ter D, Docherty JP, Expert Cons<strong>en</strong>sus Panel for Us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Antipsychotic Drugs <strong>in</strong> Ol<strong>de</strong>r P. Us<strong>in</strong>g antipsychotic ag<strong>en</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> ol<strong>de</strong>r pati<strong>en</strong>ts. J Cl<strong>in</strong> Psychiatry.<br />

2004;65 Suppl 2:5-99; discussion 100-2; quiz 3-4.<br />

208. Kulbertus H. [Study of the month. The RALES study (randomized aldactone evaluation study].<br />

Rev Med Liege. 1999;54(9):770-2.<br />

209. Davies MK, Gibbs CR, Lip GY. ABC of heart failure. Managem<strong>en</strong>t: diuretics, ACE <strong>in</strong>hibitors,<br />

and nitrates. BMJ. 2000;320(7232):428-31.<br />

210. Bogunovic OJ, Gre<strong>en</strong>field SF. Practical geriatrics: Use of b<strong>en</strong>zodiazep<strong>in</strong>es among el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts. Psychiatr Serv. 2004;55(3):233-5.<br />

211. S<strong>in</strong>k KM, Hol<strong>de</strong>n KF, Yaffe K. Pharmacological treatm<strong>en</strong>t of neuropsychiatric symptoms of<br />

<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia: a review of the evi<strong>de</strong>nce. JAMA. 2005;293(5):596-608.<br />

212. Faulkner G, Prichard P, Somerville K, Langman MJ. Aspir<strong>in</strong> and bleed<strong>in</strong>g peptic ulcers <strong>in</strong> the<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly. BMJ. 1988;297(6659):1311-3.<br />

213. Gabriel SE, Jaakkima<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong> L, Bombardier C. Risk for serious gastro<strong>in</strong>test<strong>in</strong>al complications<br />

related to use of nonsteroidal anti-<strong>in</strong>flammatory drugs. A meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med.<br />

1991;115(10):787-96.<br />

214. Hamilton FA. Non-narcotic analgesics: r<strong>en</strong>al and gastro<strong>in</strong>test<strong>in</strong>al consi<strong>de</strong>rations. Introduction.<br />

Am J Med. 1998;105(1B):1S.<br />

215. Johnson AG. NSAIDs and blood pressure. Cl<strong>in</strong>ical importance for ol<strong>de</strong>r pati<strong>en</strong>ts. Drugs Ag<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

1998;12(1):17-27.<br />

216. Johnson AG, Nguy<strong>en</strong> TV, Day RO. Do nonsteroidal anti-<strong>in</strong>flammatory drugs affect blood<br />

pressure? A meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 1994;121(4):289-300.<br />

217. M<strong>en</strong>e P, Pugliese F, Patrono C. The effects of nonsteroidal anti-<strong>in</strong>flammatory drugs on human<br />

hypert<strong>en</strong>sive vascular disease. Sem<strong>in</strong> Nephrol. 1995;15(3):244-52.<br />

218. Jaffe I. Manag<strong>in</strong>g the pati<strong>en</strong>t at risk for NSAIDs toxicity. Spr<strong>in</strong>gfield, NJ: Sci<strong>en</strong>tific Therapeutics<br />

Information; 1997.<br />

219. Sampson WI. Homeopathic vs conv<strong>en</strong>tional treatm<strong>en</strong>t of vertigo. Arch Otolaryngol Head<br />

Neck Surg. 2003;129(4):497; author reply 8.


120 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

220. Frew IJ, M<strong>en</strong>on GN. Betahist<strong>in</strong>e hydrochlori<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong> M<strong>en</strong>iere's disease. Postgrad Med J.<br />

1976;52(610):501-3.<br />

221. Wilmot TJ, M<strong>en</strong>on GN. Betahist<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong> M<strong>en</strong>iere's disease. J Laryngol Otol. 1976;90(9):833-40.<br />

222. Meyer ED. [Treatm<strong>en</strong>t of M<strong>en</strong>iere disease with betahist<strong>in</strong>e dimesilate (Aequam<strong>en</strong>)--doublebl<strong>in</strong>d<br />

study versus placebo (crossover)]. Laryngol Rh<strong>in</strong>ol Otol (Stuttg). 1985;64(5):269-72.<br />

223. Mira E, Gui<strong>de</strong>tti G, Ghilardi L, Fattori B, Malann<strong>in</strong>o N, Maiol<strong>in</strong>o L, et al. Betahist<strong>in</strong>e<br />

dihydrochlori<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong> the treatm<strong>en</strong>t of peripheral vestibular vertigo. Eur Arch Otorh<strong>in</strong>olaryngol.<br />

2003;260(2):73-7.<br />

224. James AL, Burton MJ. Betahist<strong>in</strong>e for M<strong>en</strong>iere's disease or syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst<br />

Rev. 2001(1):CD001873.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 121<br />

5 APPENDICES<br />

APPENDIX 1: ORGANISATIEKENMERKEN VAN<br />

BELGISCHE RUSTHUIZEN (ROB) EN RUST- EN<br />

VERZORGINGSTEHUIZEN (RVT)<br />

Deze app<strong>en</strong>dix bevat e<strong>en</strong> beschrijv<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> data over <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>gsk<strong>en</strong>merk<strong>en</strong>, die<br />

door het RIZIV/INAMI ter beschikk<strong>in</strong>g gesteld zijn. De data wer<strong>de</strong>n <strong>in</strong> functie van <strong>de</strong><br />

studie gereorganiseerd. Het resultaat van <strong>de</strong>ze manipulaties is <strong>de</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ale dataset waarmee<br />

<strong>de</strong> analyses <strong>in</strong> sectie 1.1 uitgevoerd zijn. Op basis van <strong>de</strong> data die door het RIZIV<br />

overgemaakt zijn, is e<strong>en</strong> database aangemaakt volg<strong>en</strong>s on<strong>de</strong>rstaand schema. De database<br />

bestaat uit 4 tabell<strong>en</strong>. We gev<strong>en</strong> voor elke tabel <strong>de</strong> variabel<strong>en</strong> die er<strong>in</strong> zijn opg<strong>en</strong>om<strong>en</strong>,<br />

e<strong>en</strong> omschrijv<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> variabele <strong>en</strong> het aantal observaties. E<strong>en</strong> aantal van <strong>de</strong> variabel<strong>en</strong><br />

zijn door <strong>de</strong> on<strong>de</strong>rzoeksequipe aangemaakt.<br />

Tabel 1 : INSTITUTION_CHR<br />

Variabele Beschrijv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

riziv_nr_an geco<strong>de</strong>er<strong>de</strong> vorm van i<strong>de</strong>ntificati<strong>en</strong>ummer van <strong>de</strong> ROB of RVT<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitut_an geco<strong>de</strong>er<strong>de</strong> vorm van i<strong>de</strong>ntificati<strong>en</strong>ummer van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Type type dat overe<strong>en</strong>komt met riziv_nr: {ROB, RVT}<br />

NIS NIS-co<strong>de</strong> van arrondissem<strong>en</strong>t <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Nr_beds aantal bed<strong>de</strong>n laatste kwartaal 2004 per riziv_nr<br />

In <strong>de</strong> tabel INSTITUTION_CHR zitt<strong>en</strong> volg<strong>en</strong>d aantal observaties:<br />

Totaal ROB <strong>en</strong> RVT 3,661<br />

Totaal <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> 2,650<br />

Totaal ROB <strong>en</strong> RVT 1 bed 2,693<br />

Totaal <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> 1 bed 1,720<br />

We gebruik<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> term <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g of <strong>in</strong>stitution voor het gebouw of <strong>de</strong> gebouw<strong>en</strong> met<br />

ofwel uitsluit<strong>en</strong>d ROB-bed<strong>de</strong>n, ofwel uitsluit<strong>en</strong>d RVT-bed<strong>de</strong>n of ROB- én RVT-bed<strong>de</strong>n.<br />

Het <strong>de</strong>el van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g met ROB-bed<strong>de</strong>n noem<strong>en</strong> we rest home , het <strong>de</strong>el met RVTbed<strong>de</strong>n<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g home .<br />

Tabel 2 : RIZIV_LAY_DAY<br />

Variabele Beschrijv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

riziv_nr_an geco<strong>de</strong>er<strong>de</strong> vorm van i<strong>de</strong>ntificati<strong>en</strong>ummer van <strong>de</strong> ROB of RVT<br />

<strong>en</strong>titled rechthebb<strong>en</strong>d of niet: {yes,no}<br />

<strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy ROB: {O,A,B,C,Cd}<br />

RVT: {B,C,Cd,Cc}<br />

nr_lay_day aantal gefactureer<strong>de</strong> ligdag<strong>en</strong> laatste kwartaal 2004<br />

fl_maxbeds 1: record maakt <strong>de</strong>el uit van <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g die <strong>in</strong> laatste kwartaal 2004 meer dan<br />

103% gefactureer<strong>de</strong> ligdag<strong>en</strong> had t.o.v. (aantal bed<strong>de</strong>n x 92 dag<strong>en</strong>) <strong>in</strong> gegev<strong>en</strong>sbestand<br />

RIZIV_LAY_DAY<br />

0: records die niet on<strong>de</strong>r 1 vall<strong>en</strong><br />

In <strong>de</strong> tabel RIZIV_LAY_DAY zitt<strong>en</strong> volg<strong>en</strong>d aantal observaties:<br />

Verwij<strong>de</strong>rd want niet RVT/ROB (bv. c<strong>en</strong>tra voor<br />

298<br />

dagverzorg<strong>in</strong>g)<br />

Totaal na verwij<strong>de</strong>r<strong>in</strong>g 24,198


122 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Tabel 3 : PERSONNEL_DETAIL<br />

Variabele Beschrijv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

riziv_nr_an geco<strong>de</strong>er<strong>de</strong> vorm van i<strong>de</strong>ntificati<strong>en</strong>ummer van <strong>de</strong> ROB of RVT<br />

Qualification 1 verpleegkundige A1<br />

2 verpleegkundige A2<br />

3 ziek<strong>en</strong>huisassist<strong>en</strong>t<br />

4 verzorg<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong><br />

5 k<strong>in</strong>e<br />

6 ergo<br />

7 logo<br />

8 reactiver<strong>in</strong>gspersoneel<br />

9 an<strong>de</strong>r personeel A1/univ.<br />

10 an<strong>de</strong>r personeel A2<br />

11 an<strong>de</strong>r personeel < A2<br />

fte_amount Full time equival<strong>en</strong>t voor beroepskwalificatie<br />

fte_nr Aantal personeelsle<strong>de</strong>n met waar<strong>de</strong> van fte_amount (vb fte_amount=0.75 <strong>en</strong> fte_nr=3<br />

betek<strong>en</strong>t 3 personeelsle<strong>de</strong>n met 0.75 fte)<br />

In <strong>de</strong> tabel PERSONNEL_DETAIL zitt<strong>en</strong> volg<strong>en</strong>d aantal observaties:<br />

Verwij<strong>de</strong>rd want niet RVT/ROB (bv. c<strong>en</strong>tra voor<br />

314<br />

dagverzorg<strong>in</strong>g)<br />

Totaal na verwij<strong>de</strong>r<strong>in</strong>g 101,733<br />

Tabel 4 : KATZ_SCORES<br />

Variabele Beschrijv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

pID uniek i<strong>de</strong>ntificati<strong>en</strong>ummer patiënt, <strong>en</strong>kel voor <strong>de</strong>ze studie<br />

riziv_nr_an geco<strong>de</strong>er<strong>de</strong> vorm van i<strong>de</strong>ntificati<strong>en</strong>ummer van <strong>de</strong> ROB of RVT<br />

birthyear geboortejaar pati<strong>en</strong>t<br />

g<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>r geslacht van <strong>de</strong> patiënt: {M,V}<br />

<strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong>d_cat Afhankelijkheidscategorie op basis van <strong>de</strong> Katz-scores: {O,A,B,C}<br />

katz_wash evaluatie hulpbehoev<strong>en</strong>dheid m.b.t. zich wass<strong>en</strong> {1,2,3,4}<br />

katz_dress evaluatie hulpbehoev<strong>en</strong>dheid m.b.t. zich aankle<strong>de</strong>n {1,2,3,4}<br />

katz_transfer evaluatie hulpbehoev<strong>en</strong>dheid m.b.t. zich kunn<strong>en</strong> verplaats<strong>en</strong> {1,2,3,4}<br />

katz_wc evaluatie hulpbehoev<strong>en</strong>dheid m.b.t. toiletbezoek {1,2,3,4}<br />

katz_cont<strong>in</strong> evaluatie hulpbehoev<strong>en</strong>dheid m.b.t. ur<strong>in</strong>e <strong>en</strong> faeces cont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>tie {1,2,3,4}<br />

katz_food evaluatie hulpbehoev<strong>en</strong>dheid m.b.t. et<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> dr<strong>in</strong>k<strong>en</strong> {1,2,3,4}<br />

katz_time evaluatie hulpbehoev<strong>en</strong>dheid m.b.t. oriëntatie <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> tijd {1,2,3,4,5}<br />

katz_space evaluatie hulpbehoev<strong>en</strong>dheid m.b.t. oriëntatie <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> ruimte {1,2,3,4,5}<br />

In <strong>de</strong> tabel KATZ_SCORES zitt<strong>en</strong> volg<strong>en</strong>d aantal observaties (toestand op 31/12/2004):<br />

Verwij<strong>de</strong>rd want niet geldige co<strong>de</strong>s 17<br />

Verwij<strong>de</strong>rd want niet RVT/ROB 564<br />

Totaal na verwij<strong>de</strong>r<strong>in</strong>g 117,926


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 123<br />

APPENDIX 2: OVERZICHT WETTELIJKE<br />

BEVOEGDHEDEN EN BESCHIKBARE<br />

GEGEVENSBRONNEN M.B.T. RUSTHUIZEN EN<br />

RUST- EN VERZORGINGSTEHUIZEN<br />

INLEIDING<br />

Het doel van dit docum<strong>en</strong>t is om bestaan<strong>de</strong> (adm<strong>in</strong>istratieve) gegev<strong>en</strong>sbronn<strong>en</strong> m.b.t.<br />

<strong>de</strong> <strong>rust</strong>huissector <strong>in</strong> kaart te br<strong>en</strong>g<strong>en</strong>. Deze gegev<strong>en</strong>s kunn<strong>en</strong> zowel betrekk<strong>in</strong>g hebb<strong>en</strong><br />

op <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g als op <strong>de</strong> bewoners ervan. Daarom werd <strong>in</strong> eerste <strong>in</strong>stantie nagegaan<br />

welke gegev<strong>en</strong>s ROB/RVT al dan niet periodiek di<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> te rapporter<strong>en</strong> aan <strong>de</strong><br />

verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> beleids<strong>in</strong>stanties. Het is niet <strong>de</strong> bedoel<strong>in</strong>g om <strong>in</strong> dit <strong>de</strong>el reeds concrete<br />

gegev<strong>en</strong>s of cijfers te pres<strong>en</strong>ter<strong>en</strong>. Er wordt echter wel e<strong>en</strong> globaal beeld geschetst<br />

over welke gegev<strong>en</strong>s <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> moet<strong>en</strong> rapporter<strong>en</strong> aan <strong>de</strong> verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stanties<br />

(zowel fe<strong>de</strong>rale als regionale). Uit <strong>de</strong> opsomm<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> blijkt dat <strong>de</strong> ROB/RVT aan e<strong>en</strong><br />

aantal <strong>in</strong>stanties verantwoord<strong>in</strong>g verschuldigd zijn <strong>en</strong> dat er soms e<strong>en</strong> (aanzi<strong>en</strong>lijke)<br />

overlapp<strong>in</strong>g is van data die meege<strong>de</strong>eld di<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> te wor<strong>de</strong>n aan <strong>de</strong> verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>stanties. Ver<strong>de</strong>r di<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> nog e<strong>en</strong> groot aantal docum<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong>, vergunn<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>,<br />

overe<strong>en</strong>komst<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> verslag<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g ter beschikk<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>spectie gehou<strong>de</strong>n<br />

te wor<strong>de</strong>n. Behalve <strong>de</strong>ze verplichte rapporter<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> betreff<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividuele<br />

<strong>rust</strong>huisk<strong>en</strong>merk<strong>en</strong>, personeels- <strong>en</strong> bewonersgegev<strong>en</strong>s op het niveau van het <strong>rust</strong>huis<br />

wor<strong>de</strong>n ook gegev<strong>en</strong>s verzameld op het niveau van <strong>de</strong> bewoners (<strong>de</strong><br />

facturer<strong>in</strong>gsgegev<strong>en</strong>s gezondheidszorg betreff<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> <strong>de</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eeskundige verstrekk<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>de</strong> Farmanet-gegev<strong>en</strong>s betreff<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>).<br />

Ver<strong>de</strong>r zijn er <strong>in</strong> het verle<strong>de</strong>n reeds studies uitgevoerd die (sommige <strong>de</strong>elaspect<strong>en</strong> van)<br />

<strong>de</strong> <strong>rust</strong>huissector <strong>en</strong>/of hun bewoners beschrijv<strong>en</strong> of on<strong>de</strong>rzoek<strong>en</strong> (bv. Quali<strong>de</strong>mI <strong>en</strong><br />

Quali<strong>de</strong>mII, grijze literatuur, ). Deze studies gev<strong>en</strong> e<strong>en</strong> dikwijls e<strong>en</strong> algeme<strong>en</strong> beeld (al<br />

dan niet aan <strong>de</strong> hand van steekproev<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> veldon<strong>de</strong>rzoek), maar stell<strong>en</strong> ge<strong>en</strong> gegev<strong>en</strong>s<br />

of resultat<strong>en</strong> beschikbaar op <strong>in</strong>dividueel <strong>rust</strong>huis- of bewonersniveau. In dit <strong>de</strong>el wordt<br />

<strong>de</strong> nadruk gelegd op e<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>v<strong>en</strong>tarisatie van gegev<strong>en</strong>s die <strong>in</strong> pr<strong>in</strong>cipe voor elk <strong>rust</strong>huis <strong>en</strong><br />

voor elke bewoner gek<strong>en</strong>d zijn door diverse adm<strong>in</strong>istraties <strong>en</strong> di<strong>en</strong>st<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> die dus, mits<br />

toestemm<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> bevoeg<strong>de</strong> di<strong>en</strong>st<strong>en</strong>, <strong>in</strong> pr<strong>in</strong>cipe (<strong>en</strong> ev<strong>en</strong>tueel na koppel<strong>in</strong>g)<br />

beschikbaar <strong>en</strong> bruikbaar zou<strong>de</strong>n kunn<strong>en</strong> zijn voor dit on<strong>de</strong>rzoek. De gerapporteer<strong>de</strong><br />

gegev<strong>en</strong>s zijn echter niet exhaustief : ze zijn gelimiteerd tot die data die relevant zijn<br />

voor <strong>de</strong> ver<strong>de</strong>re realisatie van het PHEBE-project. Derhalve zal <strong>de</strong> nadruk ligg<strong>en</strong> op<br />

gegev<strong>en</strong>s die betrekk<strong>in</strong>g hebb<strong>en</strong> op <strong>de</strong> organisatiek<strong>en</strong>merk<strong>en</strong> van het <strong>rust</strong>huis <strong>en</strong> op <strong>de</strong><br />

g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Wij situer<strong>en</strong> kort <strong>de</strong> voornaamste fe<strong>de</strong>rale <strong>en</strong> regionale beleidsverantwoor<strong>de</strong>lijk<strong>en</strong><br />

m.b.t. <strong>de</strong> <strong>rust</strong>huissector, zowel op politiek als op adm<strong>in</strong>istratief niveau. Ook wordt e<strong>en</strong><br />

opsomm<strong>in</strong>g gegev<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> gegev<strong>en</strong>s die ROB/RVT verplicht periodiek di<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> te<br />

rapporter<strong>en</strong> aan <strong>de</strong> diverse <strong>in</strong>stanties of ter beschikk<strong>in</strong>g te hou<strong>de</strong>n van <strong>in</strong>specties. Tot<br />

slot wordt kort opgesomd welke gegev<strong>en</strong>s op bewonersniveau via <strong>de</strong> VI gek<strong>en</strong>d zijn<br />

(koppel<strong>in</strong>g van bewonersgegev<strong>en</strong>s aan facturer<strong>in</strong>gsgegev<strong>en</strong>s gezondheidszorg <strong>en</strong><br />

Farmanet).<br />

SITUERING VAN BELEIDSVERANTWOORDELIJKHEDEN<br />

De complexe Belgische staatsstructuur heeft ook gevolg<strong>en</strong> voor <strong>de</strong> werk<strong>in</strong>g van<br />

ROB/RVT <strong>en</strong> voor <strong>de</strong> (verplichte) periodieke <strong>en</strong> occasionele rapporter<strong>in</strong>g van gegev<strong>en</strong>s<br />

omtr<strong>en</strong>t hun werk<strong>in</strong>g. De ge<strong>de</strong>el<strong>de</strong> fe<strong>de</strong>rale <strong>en</strong> regionale bevoegdhe<strong>de</strong>n betreff<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> <strong>de</strong><br />

<strong>rust</strong>huissector <strong>en</strong> hun bewoners geeft aanleid<strong>in</strong>g tot zowel e<strong>en</strong> duplicatie als tot e<strong>en</strong><br />

versnipper<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> gegev<strong>en</strong>s(bronn<strong>en</strong>).


124 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Fe<strong>de</strong>rale Overheid<br />

Op het fe<strong>de</strong>rale niveau vall<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> ROB/RVT voornamelijk on<strong>de</strong>r <strong>de</strong> politieke<br />

verantwoor<strong>de</strong>lijkheid van <strong>de</strong> M<strong>in</strong>ister van Sociale Zak<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> Volksgezondheid waar<br />

vooral <strong>de</strong> cel Zorg<strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> farmaceutische specialiteit<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> sector opvolgt.<br />

Adm<strong>in</strong>istratief zijn <strong>de</strong>ze bevoegdhe<strong>de</strong>n ver<strong>de</strong>eld over twee Fe<strong>de</strong>rale OverheidsDi<strong>en</strong>st<strong>en</strong><br />

(FOD), <strong>en</strong>erzijds <strong>de</strong> FOD Sociale Zekerheid (<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> Op<strong>en</strong>bare Instell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> van Sociale<br />

Zekerheid) <strong>en</strong> an<strong>de</strong>rzijds <strong>de</strong> FOD Volksgezondheid, Veiligheid van <strong>de</strong> Voedselket<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong><br />

Leefmilieu.<br />

B<strong>in</strong>n<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> FOD Sociale Zekerheid zijn het Directoraat-G<strong>en</strong>eraal (DG) Sociaal beleid <strong>en</strong><br />

het DG Sociale Inspectie <strong>de</strong> meest relevante di<strong>en</strong>st<strong>en</strong>. Ook het RIZIV valt on<strong>de</strong>r <strong>de</strong><br />

bevoegdheid van <strong>de</strong>ze FOD. S<strong>in</strong>ds 1 januari 2002 heeft het RIZIV e<strong>en</strong><br />

bestuursovere<strong>en</strong>komst met <strong>de</strong> Staat <strong>en</strong> is daardoor e<strong>en</strong> op<strong>en</strong>bare <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g voor sociale<br />

zekerheid (OISZ) gewor<strong>de</strong>n. E<strong>en</strong> OISZ beheert e<strong>en</strong> sociale zekerheidstak <strong>en</strong> verstrekt<br />

<strong>in</strong> e<strong>en</strong> aantal gevall<strong>en</strong> sociale prestaties aan <strong>de</strong>g<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> die hierop recht hebb<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Het is echter vooral <strong>de</strong> FOD Volksgezondheid, Veiligheid van <strong>de</strong> Voedselket<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong><br />

Leefmilieu <strong>en</strong> meer specifiek het DG Organisatie van <strong>de</strong> Gezondheidsvoorzi<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> die<br />

van groot belang is voor <strong>de</strong> werk<strong>in</strong>g van <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong>. B<strong>in</strong>n<strong>en</strong> dit DG is <strong>de</strong> Cel Ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>-<br />

<strong>en</strong> Chronische Zorg belast met <strong>de</strong> voorbereid<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> on<strong>de</strong>rsteun<strong>in</strong>g van het fe<strong>de</strong>rale<br />

beleid <strong>in</strong>zake ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>- <strong>en</strong> chronische zorg.<br />

Ver<strong>de</strong>r zijn er ook nog partiële bevoegdhe<strong>de</strong>n (voornamelijk <strong>in</strong>specties <strong>en</strong> controles op<br />

nalev<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> wetgev<strong>in</strong>g) voor :<br />

Geme<strong>en</strong>schapp<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> Gewest<strong>en</strong><br />

FOD Sociale Zekerheid (Controle op correcte toepass<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong><br />

sociale zekerheidswett<strong>en</strong> (R.S.Z-wetgev<strong>in</strong>g, jaarlijkse vakantie,<br />

arbeidsongevall<strong>en</strong>, k<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>rbijslag voor loonarbei<strong>de</strong>rs, ) <strong>en</strong> bestrijd<strong>in</strong>g<br />

van sociale frau<strong>de</strong>)<br />

FOD Werkgeleg<strong>en</strong>heid, Arbeid <strong>en</strong> Sociaal Overleg (Inspectie Welzijn<br />

op het werk)<br />

FOD Economie, KMO, Mid<strong>de</strong>nstand <strong>en</strong> Energie (Inspectie dagprijs,<br />

boekhoud<strong>in</strong>g)<br />

FOD F<strong>in</strong>anciën (Adm<strong>in</strong>istratie van <strong>de</strong> on<strong>de</strong>rnem<strong>in</strong>gs- <strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>kom<strong>en</strong>sfiscaliteit).<br />

Fe<strong>de</strong>raal Ag<strong>en</strong>tschap voor <strong>de</strong> Veiligheid van <strong>de</strong> Voedselket<strong>en</strong><br />

Op het niveau van <strong>de</strong> Vlaamse Geme<strong>en</strong>schap ligt <strong>de</strong> politieke verantwoor<strong>de</strong>lijkheid over<br />

<strong>de</strong> <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> bij <strong>de</strong> Vlaamse M<strong>in</strong>ister van Welzijn, Volksgezondheid <strong>en</strong> Gez<strong>in</strong>.<br />

Adm<strong>in</strong>istratief is het Departem<strong>en</strong>t Welzijn, Volksgezondheid <strong>en</strong> Cultuur (WVC)<br />

bevoegd. Meer specifiek zijn vooral twee adm<strong>in</strong>istraties b<strong>in</strong>n<strong>en</strong> dit <strong>de</strong>partem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

betrokk<strong>en</strong> bij het beleid betreff<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong>, met name <strong>de</strong> Adm<strong>in</strong>istratie<br />

Gezondheidszorg <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> Adm<strong>in</strong>istratie Gez<strong>in</strong> <strong>en</strong> Maatschappelijk Welzijn. B<strong>in</strong>n<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong><br />

Adm<strong>in</strong>istratie Gezondheidszorg is vooral <strong>de</strong> Af<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g Verzorg<strong>in</strong>gsvoorzi<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> van<br />

belang.<br />

On<strong>de</strong>r <strong>de</strong> Adm<strong>in</strong>istratie Gez<strong>in</strong> <strong>en</strong> Maatschappelijk Welzijn ressorteert <strong>de</strong> Af<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Inspectie <strong>en</strong> Toezicht die <strong>de</strong> welzijnsdi<strong>en</strong>st<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>specteert die door <strong>de</strong>ze adm<strong>in</strong>istratie<br />

wor<strong>de</strong>n erk<strong>en</strong>d <strong>en</strong>/of gesubsidieerd (bv. ROB). On<strong>de</strong>r <strong>de</strong>ze adm<strong>in</strong>istratie bev<strong>in</strong>dt zich<br />

ook <strong>de</strong> Af<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g Welzijnszorg. De erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g (<strong>en</strong> subsidiër<strong>in</strong>g) behoort niet tot <strong>de</strong><br />

bevoegdheid Inspectie <strong>en</strong> Toezicht, wel tot <strong>de</strong> bevoegdheid van <strong>de</strong> Af<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Welzijnszorg. Deze laatste af<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g omvat o.a. e<strong>en</strong> Team Ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>voorzi<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>. Dit<br />

team on<strong>de</strong>rzoekt <strong>en</strong> doet voorstell<strong>en</strong> aan <strong>de</strong> m<strong>in</strong>ister <strong>in</strong>zake programmatie <strong>en</strong><br />

erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g voor <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong>, serviceflatgebouw<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> werk<strong>in</strong>gstoelag<strong>en</strong> aan<br />

ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>voorzi<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>. Daarnaast verricht het team beleidsvoorberei<strong>de</strong>nd werk <strong>en</strong>


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 125<br />

br<strong>en</strong>gt advies uit aan het Vlaams Infrastructuurfonds voor Persoonsgebon<strong>de</strong>n<br />

Aangeleg<strong>en</strong>he<strong>de</strong>n (VIPA). Het team k<strong>en</strong>t subsidies voor <strong>de</strong> animatiewerk<strong>in</strong>g toe aan <strong>de</strong><br />

erk<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong>. De ROB/RVT <strong>in</strong>specties van <strong>de</strong> Vlaamse Geme<strong>en</strong>schap omvatt<strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>de</strong> Inspectie Welzijn, Inspectie Volksgezondheid <strong>en</strong> Brandweer<strong>in</strong>spectie.<br />

Ver<strong>de</strong>r is er nog e<strong>en</strong> Gezam<strong>en</strong>lijk loket ROB, RVT <strong>en</strong> Inspectie <strong>en</strong> Toezicht om <strong>de</strong><br />

ROB-<strong>in</strong>specties (Adm<strong>in</strong>istratie Gez<strong>in</strong> <strong>en</strong> Maatschappelijk Welzijn) <strong>en</strong> RVT-<strong>in</strong>specties<br />

(Adm<strong>in</strong>istratie Gezondheidszorg) zoveel mogelijk te coörd<strong>in</strong>er<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> om <strong>de</strong> ROB- <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong><br />

RVT-erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g op <strong>de</strong>zelf<strong>de</strong> dag te <strong>in</strong>specter<strong>en</strong> (weliswaar door twee <strong>in</strong>specteurs<br />

behor<strong>en</strong>d tot verschill<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istraties).<br />

Op het niveau van <strong>de</strong> Franstalige Geme<strong>en</strong>schap ligt <strong>de</strong> politieke verantwoor<strong>de</strong>lijkheid<br />

over <strong>de</strong> <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> bij <strong>de</strong> M<strong>in</strong>istre <strong>de</strong> la Santé, <strong>de</strong> l Action sociale et <strong>de</strong> l Egalité <strong>de</strong>s<br />

Chances.<br />

De adm<strong>in</strong>istratieve overheidsdi<strong>en</strong>st die betrokk<strong>en</strong> is bij het <strong>rust</strong>huisbeleid is <strong>de</strong><br />

Direction Générale <strong>de</strong> l Action sociale et <strong>de</strong> la Santé <strong>en</strong> meer specifiek <strong>de</strong> Division<br />

du Troisième âge et <strong>de</strong> la Famille . On<strong>de</strong>r <strong>de</strong>ze Division ressorteert <strong>de</strong> Direction<br />

du Troisième âge .<br />

Het Decreet van 5 juni 1997 <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> uitvoer<strong>in</strong>gsbesluit<strong>en</strong> van 3 <strong>de</strong>cember 1998 vorm<strong>en</strong><br />

sam<strong>en</strong> met het Kon<strong>in</strong>klijk Besluit van 21 september 2004 (B.S. 28/10/2004) betreff<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong><br />

<strong>de</strong> vaststell<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> norm<strong>en</strong> voor <strong>de</strong> bijzon<strong>de</strong>re erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g als <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuis of als c<strong>en</strong>trum voor dagverzorg<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>de</strong> voornaamste wettelijke basis<br />

voor <strong>de</strong> uitvoer<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> compet<strong>en</strong>ties van <strong>de</strong>ze di<strong>en</strong>st<strong>en</strong>. Deze di<strong>en</strong>st<strong>en</strong> hebb<strong>en</strong>,<br />

b<strong>in</strong>n<strong>en</strong> het ka<strong>de</strong>r van <strong>de</strong> programmatie vastgelegd door <strong>de</strong> Waalse reger<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>de</strong><br />

bevoegdheid om ROB/RVT <strong>en</strong> CDV te erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>en</strong>. Ver<strong>de</strong>r behor<strong>en</strong> ook <strong>de</strong> normer<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>specties <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> behan<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g van klacht<strong>en</strong> tot hun tak<strong>en</strong>pakket. Niet nalev<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong><br />

norm<strong>en</strong> kan, na advies van <strong>de</strong> betrokk<strong>en</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istratie, lei<strong>de</strong>n tot <strong>de</strong> besliss<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong><br />

bevoeg<strong>de</strong> m<strong>in</strong>ister om <strong>de</strong> erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g op te schort<strong>en</strong>, te weiger<strong>en</strong> of om <strong>de</strong> erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

te trekk<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Ook <strong>de</strong> Duitstalige Geme<strong>en</strong>schap heeft bevoegdhe<strong>de</strong>n, met name <strong>de</strong> M<strong>in</strong>ister für<br />

Ausbildung un Beschäftigung, Soziales und Turismus als politieke overheid <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong><br />

Abteilung Familie, Gesundheid und Soziales van het M<strong>in</strong>isterium <strong>de</strong>r DG als<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istratieve overheid.<br />

Wat betreft <strong>de</strong> Ne<strong>de</strong>rlandstalige burgers <strong>in</strong> het Brusselse Gewest is <strong>de</strong> Vlaamse<br />

Geme<strong>en</strong>schapscommissie bevoegd, <strong>de</strong> Franstalige burgers <strong>in</strong> het Brussels Gewest vall<strong>en</strong><br />

on<strong>de</strong>r <strong>de</strong> bevoegdheid van <strong>de</strong> Franse Geme<strong>en</strong>schapscommissie.<br />

RAPPORTERING VAN ROB/RVT AAN DIVERSE BELEIDSINSTANTIES<br />

FOD Volksgezondheid, Veiligheid van <strong>de</strong> Voedselket<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> Leefmilieu<br />

Wat betreft <strong>de</strong> jaarlijkse statistische RVT-<strong>en</strong>quête FOD Volksgezondheid, Veiligheid van<br />

<strong>de</strong> Voedselket<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> Leefmilieu jaarlijkse di<strong>en</strong>t vermeld te wor<strong>de</strong>n dat <strong>de</strong> cel<br />

Chronische <strong>en</strong> ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>zorg e<strong>en</strong> nieuw formulier voor <strong>de</strong> statistische RVT-<strong>en</strong>quête<br />

voorbereidt. Aangezi<strong>en</strong> dit project echter nog niet afgerond is, meldt <strong>de</strong> FOD<br />

Volksgezondheid, Veiligheid van <strong>de</strong> Voedselket<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> Leefmilieu <strong>in</strong> e<strong>en</strong> omz<strong>en</strong>dbrief aan<br />

<strong>de</strong> directies van <strong>de</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong> dat <strong>de</strong> statistische RVT-gegev<strong>en</strong>s 2004<br />

niet verzameld zull<strong>en</strong> wor<strong>de</strong>n.


126 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

FOD Sociale Zekerheid (RIZIV, OISZ)<br />

De ROB <strong>en</strong> RVT di<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> per trimester e<strong>en</strong> aantal gegev<strong>en</strong>s mee te <strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> aan het RIZIV<br />

t<strong>en</strong>e<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong> <strong>de</strong> Di<strong>en</strong>st Verzorg<strong>in</strong>gs<strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> staat te stell<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> tegemoetkom<strong>in</strong>g te<br />

berek<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> voor volg<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> dome<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong> :<br />

Instell<strong>in</strong>gsforfait ROB-RVT <strong>en</strong> CDV<br />

F<strong>in</strong>ancier<strong>in</strong>g maatregel<strong>en</strong> "e<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>loopbaan"<br />

F<strong>in</strong>ancier<strong>in</strong>g maatregel<strong>en</strong> loonharmoniser<strong>in</strong>g voor bov<strong>en</strong>normpersoneel<br />

("<strong>de</strong>r<strong>de</strong> luik").<br />

De vereiste gegev<strong>en</strong>s kunn<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>ge<strong>de</strong>eld wor<strong>de</strong>n <strong>in</strong> drie grote categorieën:<br />

Inricht<strong>in</strong>g (Informatie over <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>richt<strong>in</strong>g/di<strong>en</strong>st)<br />

Personeel (Informatie m.b.t. <strong>de</strong> contract<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> personeelsle<strong>de</strong>n, <strong>en</strong><br />

het aantal gepresteer<strong>de</strong> ur<strong>en</strong>/dag<strong>en</strong> per trimester)<br />

Dag<strong>en</strong> (Aantal gefactureer<strong>de</strong> dag<strong>en</strong> voor rechthebb<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>n <strong>en</strong> an<strong>de</strong>re<br />

patiënt<strong>en</strong>)<br />

E<strong>en</strong> aantal van <strong>de</strong>ze gegev<strong>en</strong>s (bv. m.b.t. <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>richt<strong>in</strong>g) wor<strong>de</strong>n reeds vooraf <strong>in</strong>gevuld<br />

door het RIZIV <strong>en</strong> di<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> door <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g slechts gecontroleerd <strong>en</strong> ev<strong>en</strong>tueel<br />

aangevuld of gecorrigeerd te wor<strong>de</strong>n.<br />

Gegev<strong>en</strong>s met betrekk<strong>in</strong>g tot <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>richt<strong>in</strong>g/di<strong>en</strong>st<br />

Personeel<br />

B<strong>en</strong>am<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> Riziv-nummer<br />

Gemid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>de</strong> wekelijkse arbeidsduur voor voltijdse prestaties (het aantal<br />

ur<strong>en</strong> per week dat er door e<strong>en</strong> voltijds equival<strong>en</strong>t moet gepresteerd<br />

wor<strong>de</strong>n <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>richt<strong>in</strong>g)<br />

Geme<strong>en</strong>schap / Gewest<br />

Sector : OCMW, Privaat VZW of Privaat commercieel<br />

Coörd<strong>in</strong>er<strong>en</strong>d g<strong>en</strong>eesheer (<strong>en</strong>kel voor <strong>in</strong>richt<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> met RVT) : ja/ne<strong>en</strong><br />

Palliatieve functie (<strong>en</strong>kel voor e<strong>en</strong> aantal ROB <strong>en</strong> RVT) : ja/ne<strong>en</strong><br />

Het gaat hier om <strong>de</strong> gegev<strong>en</strong>s m.b.t. <strong>de</strong> <strong>rust</strong>oordf<strong>in</strong>ancier<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>de</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ancier<strong>in</strong>g <strong>de</strong>r<strong>de</strong><br />

luik (kostprijs harmoniser<strong>in</strong>g loonbarema s <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> ROB-RVT-CDV) <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ancier<strong>in</strong>g<br />

van <strong>de</strong> e<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>loopbaan. On<strong>de</strong>r personeelsle<strong>de</strong>n wordt bedoeld : al het loontrekk<strong>en</strong>d<br />

personeel, het statutair personeel <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> op<strong>en</strong>bare <strong>in</strong>richt<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>/di<strong>en</strong>st<strong>en</strong>, het <strong>in</strong>terimpersoneel,<br />

<strong>de</strong> zelfstandige verantwoor<strong>de</strong>lijke van e<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>richt<strong>in</strong>g/di<strong>en</strong>st <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> zelfstandige<br />

verpleegkundig<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong>/of paramedici.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 127<br />

Persoonsgegev<strong>en</strong>s<br />

Per personeelslid wor<strong>de</strong>n o.a. volg<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> gegev<strong>en</strong>s gevraagd (of di<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> gecontroleerd te<br />

wor<strong>de</strong>n) :<br />

Kwalificatie : keuze mak<strong>en</strong> uit<br />

Verpleegkundige A1<br />

Verpleegkundige A2<br />

Verpleegassist<strong>en</strong>t(e)<br />

Verzorg<strong>in</strong>gspersoneel<br />

K<strong>in</strong>esitherapeut<br />

Ergotherapeut<br />

Logopedist<br />

Personeel voor reactiver<strong>in</strong>g (A1 zie lijst <strong>in</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ancier<strong>in</strong>gsbesluit ROB-<br />

RVT-CDV van 6 november 2003 )<br />

An<strong>de</strong>re : A1 + universitair<br />

An<strong>de</strong>re : A2 (logistiek <strong>en</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istratief)<br />

An<strong>de</strong>re met e<strong>en</strong> barema lager dan A2.<br />

Type contract : keuze mak<strong>en</strong> uit<br />

Prestatiegegev<strong>en</strong>s<br />

Loontrekk<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> (<strong>in</strong>clusief statutair<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> e<strong>en</strong> op<strong>en</strong>baar bestuur)<br />

Interim-contract<br />

Zelfstandige met e<strong>en</strong> on<strong>de</strong>rnem<strong>in</strong>gscontract<br />

Loontrekk<strong>en</strong>d of statutair verantwoor<strong>de</strong>lijke van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>richt<strong>in</strong>g/di<strong>en</strong>st<br />

Zelfstandig beheer<strong>de</strong>r<br />

Loontrekk<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> Sociale Maribel<br />

Vervanger opleid<strong>in</strong>gsproject 400 verpleegkundig<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Ur<strong>en</strong> : het aantal ur<strong>en</strong>/week zoals dat blijkt uit het contract.<br />

Gegev<strong>en</strong>s over gepresteerd aantal dag<strong>en</strong>/ur<strong>en</strong> per trimester (Hier<br />

wordt e<strong>en</strong> on<strong>de</strong>rscheid gemaakt tuss<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> voltijds<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong>g<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> die<br />

<strong>de</strong>eltijds werk<strong>en</strong> : bij <strong>de</strong> voltijds<strong>en</strong> wordt <strong>en</strong>kel het aantal gepresteer<strong>de</strong><br />

dag<strong>en</strong> opgevraagd <strong>en</strong> voor <strong>de</strong> <strong>de</strong>eltijds<strong>en</strong> wordt <strong>en</strong>kel het aantal<br />

gepresteer<strong>de</strong> ur<strong>en</strong> opgevraagd <strong>in</strong> dat trimester)<br />

Gegev<strong>en</strong>s e<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>loopbaan <strong>en</strong> vrijstell<strong>in</strong>g van arbeidsprestaties<br />

Aangifte van het aantal gefactureer<strong>de</strong> dag<strong>en</strong> per trimester/ Per type <strong>in</strong>richt<strong>in</strong>g (ROB of<br />

RVT) :<br />

het aantal gefactureer<strong>de</strong> dag<strong>en</strong> per categorie van afhankelijkheid,<br />

opgesplitst <strong>in</strong> aantal dag<strong>en</strong> rechthebb<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>n <strong>en</strong> aantal dag<strong>en</strong> nietrechthebb<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>n.<br />

FOD Economie, KMO, Mid<strong>de</strong>nstand <strong>en</strong> Energie<br />

Rusthuiz<strong>en</strong> kunn<strong>en</strong> niet vrij <strong>de</strong> dagprijs bepal<strong>en</strong> die zij w<strong>en</strong>s<strong>en</strong> aan te rek<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong>. Het<br />

<strong>rust</strong>huis moet e<strong>en</strong> dossier voor prijsverhog<strong>in</strong>gaanvraag <strong>in</strong>di<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> bij <strong>de</strong> FOD Economie,<br />

KMO, Mid<strong>de</strong>nstand <strong>en</strong> Energie (m<strong>in</strong>isterie van economische zak<strong>en</strong>) die hierover zijn<br />

akkoord moet gev<strong>en</strong>. Dit aanvraagdossier di<strong>en</strong>t o.a. e<strong>en</strong> becijfer<strong>de</strong> verantwoord<strong>in</strong>g van


128 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Vlaamse overheid<br />

<strong>de</strong> gevraag<strong>de</strong> verhog<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> evolutie van <strong>de</strong> kostprijselem<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong> te bevatt<strong>en</strong>. De<br />

bevoeg<strong>de</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istratie (Algem<strong>en</strong>e Inspectie van <strong>de</strong> Prijz<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> Me<strong>de</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g) kan<br />

ev<strong>en</strong>tueel bijkom<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>formatie <strong>in</strong> w<strong>in</strong>n<strong>en</strong> bij <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> kan sommige elem<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong> e<strong>en</strong> prijz<strong>en</strong>dossier weiger<strong>en</strong> waardoor <strong>de</strong> prijsverhog<strong>in</strong>g slechts ge<strong>de</strong>eltelijk wordt<br />

aanvaard.<br />

Bov<strong>en</strong>di<strong>en</strong> bestaat er s<strong>in</strong>ds 2003 e<strong>en</strong> nota die e<strong>en</strong> lijst van elem<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong> bevat die hetzij <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>de</strong> dagprijs, hetzij als supplem<strong>en</strong>t of als voorschot t<strong>en</strong> gunste van <strong>de</strong>r<strong>de</strong>n kunn<strong>en</strong><br />

wor<strong>de</strong>n aangerek<strong>en</strong>d. De lijst van elem<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong> die <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> dagprijs moet aanwezig zijn is e<strong>en</strong><br />

basism<strong>in</strong>imum. Dit betek<strong>en</strong>t dat ie<strong>de</strong>re <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g kan besliss<strong>en</strong> om meer elem<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong> op<br />

te nem<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> dagprijs <strong>en</strong> ev<strong>en</strong>tueel e<strong>en</strong> all-<strong>in</strong>prijs aan te rek<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong>.<br />

De procedures <strong>en</strong> norm<strong>en</strong> voor erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> verl<strong>en</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g van erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g ROB/RVT<br />

wor<strong>de</strong>n voornamelijk gespecificeerd <strong>in</strong> volg<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> besluit<strong>en</strong> :<br />

Besluit van <strong>de</strong> Vlaamse reger<strong>in</strong>g van 17 juli 1985 (B.S. 30/08/1985) tot<br />

vaststell<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> norm<strong>en</strong> waaraan e<strong>en</strong> serviceflatgebouw, e<strong>en</strong><br />

won<strong>in</strong>gcomplex met di<strong>en</strong>stverl<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g of e<strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>huis moet voldo<strong>en</strong> om<br />

voor erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> aanmerk<strong>in</strong>g te kom<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Besluit van <strong>de</strong> Vlaamse reger<strong>in</strong>g van 18 februari 1997 (B.S. 17/05/1997)<br />

tot vaststell<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> procedure voor <strong>de</strong> erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> sluit<strong>in</strong>g van<br />

<strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>, psychiatrische verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>,<br />

<strong>in</strong>itiatiev<strong>en</strong> van beschut won<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> sam<strong>en</strong>werk<strong>in</strong>gsverban<strong>de</strong>n van<br />

psychiatrische <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> di<strong>en</strong>st<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Kon<strong>in</strong>klijk besluit van 21 september 2004 (B.S. 28/10/2004) hou<strong>de</strong>n<strong>de</strong><br />

vaststell<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> norm<strong>en</strong> voor <strong>de</strong> bijzon<strong>de</strong>re erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g als <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong><br />

verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuis of als c<strong>en</strong>trum voor dagverzorg<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Ver<strong>de</strong>r zijn ook nog <strong>de</strong> norm<strong>in</strong>terpretaties van belang. De adm<strong>in</strong>istratie streeft e<strong>en</strong><br />

gelijke beoor<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> alle dossiers na. Hiertoe di<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> voorzi<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> te wor<strong>de</strong>n<br />

gecontroleerd aan <strong>de</strong> hand van e<strong>en</strong> e<strong>en</strong>vormige norm<strong>in</strong>terpretatie die toelaat om<br />

rechtsonzekerheid te vermij<strong>de</strong>n omwille van het feit dat <strong>de</strong> erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>gsnorm<strong>en</strong> niet<br />

steeds ev<strong>en</strong> dui<strong>de</strong>lijk zijn.<br />

E<strong>en</strong> aanvraag tot (voorlopige) erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g of verl<strong>en</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g van erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g di<strong>en</strong>t, op straffe<br />

van onontvankelijkheid, vergezeld te zijn van e<strong>en</strong> aantal docum<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> gegev<strong>en</strong>s, zoals<br />

gestipuleerd <strong>in</strong> bov<strong>en</strong>staan<strong>de</strong> besluit<strong>en</strong>. E<strong>en</strong> voorlopige erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g (eerste aanvraag)<br />

geldt voor e<strong>en</strong> termijn van één jaar <strong>en</strong> kan op gemotiveerd verzoek van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>richt<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong><br />

macht e<strong>en</strong>maal met maximaal één jaar verl<strong>en</strong>gd wor<strong>de</strong>n. De besliss<strong>in</strong>g tot erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g<br />

vermeldt het aantal bed<strong>de</strong>n of plaats<strong>en</strong> waarvoor <strong>de</strong> erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g toegek<strong>en</strong>d wordt. De<br />

erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g wordt verle<strong>en</strong>d voor e<strong>en</strong> termijn van t<strong>en</strong> hoogste zes jaar <strong>en</strong> kan wor<strong>de</strong>n<br />

verl<strong>en</strong>gd. Elke wijzig<strong>in</strong>g die zich <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> loop van <strong>de</strong> erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>gstermijn voordoet omtr<strong>en</strong>t<br />

<strong>de</strong> gegev<strong>en</strong>s opg<strong>en</strong>om<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> docum<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong> die bij <strong>de</strong> aanvraag vergezeld wer<strong>de</strong>n, di<strong>en</strong>t<br />

onverwijld te wor<strong>de</strong>n meege<strong>de</strong>eld aan <strong>de</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istratie. Wat betreft ev<strong>en</strong>wel <strong>de</strong><br />

wijzig<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> personeelsgegev<strong>en</strong>s van <strong>de</strong> voorzi<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g, volstaat e<strong>en</strong> jaarlijkse opgave<br />

b<strong>in</strong>n<strong>en</strong> drie maan<strong>de</strong>n na verstrijk<strong>en</strong> van het kal<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>rjaar.<br />

Op <strong>de</strong>ze manier beschikt <strong>de</strong> Vlaamse overheid over e<strong>en</strong> aanzi<strong>en</strong>lijk aantal gegev<strong>en</strong>s<br />

betreff<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> ROB/RVT. Bov<strong>en</strong>di<strong>en</strong> di<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> nog e<strong>en</strong> aantal docum<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong>, vergunn<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>,<br />

overe<strong>en</strong>komst<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> verslag<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g ter beschikk<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>spectie gehou<strong>de</strong>n<br />

te wor<strong>de</strong>n. De voor dit on<strong>de</strong>rzoek relevante categorieën van <strong>de</strong> zak<strong>en</strong> die bevraagd<br />

wor<strong>de</strong>n, wor<strong>de</strong>n hieron<strong>de</strong>r gerapporteerd.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 129<br />

I. IDENTIFICATIE VAN DE VOORZIENING EN DE VERANTWOORDELIJKE<br />

(BEHEERSINSTANTIE)<br />

II. ERKENNINGSTOESTAND<br />

III. ORGANISATIE VAN DE VOORZIENING<br />

Coörd<strong>in</strong>er<strong>en</strong>d <strong>en</strong> raadgev<strong>en</strong>d arts<br />

IV. AANBOD EN BEWONERSPROFIEL<br />

Bewonersprofiel<br />

Evolutie van <strong>de</strong> gemid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>de</strong> bezett<strong>in</strong>gsgraad <strong>en</strong> verblijfsduur (2001, 2002, 2003 <strong>en</strong> 2004)<br />

Dagprijz<strong>en</strong><br />

V. NALEVING VAN DE ERKENNINGSNORMEN<br />

(BESLUIT VLAAMSE REGERING 17/07/1985 <strong>en</strong> K.B. 21/09/2004)<br />

Algem<strong>en</strong>e norm<strong>en</strong><br />

Architectonische norm<strong>en</strong><br />

Functionele norm<strong>en</strong><br />

Organisatorische norm<strong>en</strong><br />

o Medicatie<br />

o Doelgroep<strong>en</strong><br />

Dem<strong>en</strong>ter<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> bewoners:<br />

Zijn <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> voorzi<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g an<strong>de</strong>re doelgroep<strong>en</strong> aanwezig?<br />

o Personeelska<strong>de</strong>r<br />

Ver<strong>de</strong>r di<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> e<strong>en</strong> aantal docum<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong> ter beschikk<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> Inspectie te<br />

wor<strong>de</strong>n gehou<strong>de</strong>n <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> voorzi<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g (het <strong>in</strong>spectiebezoek met het oog op het<br />

on<strong>de</strong>rzoek van <strong>de</strong>ze aanvraag tot verl<strong>en</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g van erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g wordt vooraf aangekondigd).<br />

Kopie:<br />

Ter <strong>in</strong>zage:<br />

Score zorgafhankelijkheid van <strong>de</strong> bewoners d.d. <strong>in</strong>spectiebezoek,<br />

opgesplitst per ROB RVT statuut, met vermeld<strong>in</strong>g van aantal<br />

<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>ter<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> bewoners, aantal bewoners jonger dan 60 jaar, aantal<br />

bewoners <strong>in</strong> erk<strong>en</strong>d kortverblijf <strong>en</strong> aantal gehospitaliseer<strong>de</strong> bewoners.<br />

Nom<strong>in</strong>atieve personeelslijst van alle me<strong>de</strong>werkers d.d. <strong>in</strong>spectiebezoek,<br />

met e<strong>en</strong>duidige vermeld<strong>in</strong>g van jobtime <strong>en</strong> kwalificatie per<br />

personeelslid, geor<strong>de</strong>nd per functie, <strong>en</strong> met aanduid<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong><br />

person<strong>en</strong> die langdurig afwezig zijn, <strong>in</strong> tweevoud.<br />

Personeelsregisters <strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividuele personeelsdossiers: diploma of<br />

getuigschrift, arbeidsovere<strong>en</strong>komst of raadsbesluit, bewijs goed ze<strong>de</strong>lijk<br />

gedrag.<br />

Overe<strong>en</strong>komst met <strong>de</strong> coörd<strong>in</strong>er<strong>en</strong>d <strong>en</strong> raadgev<strong>en</strong>d arts.<br />

G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>formularium.<br />

Het kwaliteitshandboek<br />

Het kwaliteitsplan<br />

Behalve <strong>de</strong> vrag<strong>en</strong>lijst die moet <strong>in</strong>gevuld wor<strong>de</strong>n bij aanvraag tot (voorlopige) erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g<br />

of verl<strong>en</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g van erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> hierop volg<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>specties (cfr. supra), di<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong><br />

<strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> ook rek<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g te hou<strong>de</strong>n met periodieke <strong>in</strong>specties. Na het <strong>in</strong>voer<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong><br />

kwaliteits<strong>de</strong>cret<strong>en</strong> zijn aan <strong>de</strong> erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>gsnorm<strong>en</strong> ook nog Sectorspecifieke M<strong>in</strong>imale<br />

Kwaliteitseis<strong>en</strong> (SMK s) toegevoegd die ev<strong>en</strong>e<strong>en</strong>s periodiek gecontroleerd wor<strong>de</strong>n.<br />

Deze <strong>in</strong>specties gebeur<strong>en</strong> (gemid<strong>de</strong>ld) om <strong>de</strong> zes maan<strong>de</strong>n (ev<strong>en</strong>tueel frequ<strong>en</strong>ter, bij<br />

voorbeeld naar aanleid<strong>in</strong>g van e<strong>en</strong> klacht) <strong>en</strong> hebb<strong>en</strong> als eerste opdracht het<br />

<strong>in</strong>specter<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>gs- <strong>en</strong> kwaliteitsnorm<strong>en</strong> (SMK s).<br />

E<strong>en</strong> eerste versie van het <strong>in</strong>spectierapport wordt steeds voorgelegd aan het betrokk<strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>rust</strong>huis (met mogelijkheid tot reactie). Daarna wordt e<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>itief verslag opgemaakt<br />

voor <strong>de</strong> af<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> die bevoegd zijn voor <strong>de</strong> erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> (ev<strong>en</strong>e<strong>en</strong>s met kopie aan het<br />

<strong>rust</strong>huis). De <strong>in</strong>spectie stelt vast of <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g <strong>de</strong> opgeleg<strong>de</strong> norm<strong>en</strong> al dan niet


130 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Waalse overheid<br />

respecteert, maar is niet bevoegd voor <strong>de</strong> erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g. De bevoegdheid van <strong>de</strong> af<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong>spectie <strong>en</strong> toezicht e<strong>in</strong>digt bij het overmak<strong>en</strong> van het <strong>in</strong>spectierapport aan <strong>de</strong> af<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g<br />

welzijnszorg die <strong>de</strong> ver<strong>de</strong>re procedure (bv. erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g, sanctioner<strong>in</strong>g) autonoom<br />

afwerkt.<br />

Ver<strong>de</strong>r di<strong>en</strong><strong>en</strong> <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> ook te voldo<strong>en</strong> aan norm<strong>en</strong> betreff<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> <strong>de</strong> boekhoud<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>de</strong><br />

m<strong>in</strong>imum<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g van het rek<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>stelsel <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> jaarrek<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g. Deze norm<strong>en</strong> zijn<br />

rec<strong>en</strong>telijk gewijzigd (januari 2006).<br />

De programmer<strong>in</strong>g, erk<strong>en</strong>n<strong>in</strong>gsnorm<strong>en</strong>, klacht<strong>en</strong>procedures boekhoudnorm<strong>en</strong>,<br />

m<strong>in</strong>imum<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g van het rek<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>stelsel <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> jaarrek<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g wor<strong>de</strong>n ge<strong>de</strong>tailleerd<br />

vastgelegd <strong>in</strong> on<strong>de</strong>rstaan<strong>de</strong> <strong>de</strong>creet <strong>en</strong> besluit.<br />

Decreet van 5 Juni 1997. Décret relatif aux maisons <strong>de</strong> repos,<br />

rési<strong>de</strong>nces-services et aux c<strong>en</strong>tres d'accueil <strong>de</strong> jour pour personnes<br />

âgées et portant création du Conseil wallon du troisième âge. (B.S.<br />

26/06/1997).<br />

Besluit van 3 <strong>de</strong>cember 1998. Arrêté du Gouvernem<strong>en</strong>t wallon portant<br />

exécution du décret du 5 ju<strong>in</strong> 1997 relatif aux maisons <strong>de</strong> repos,<br />

rési<strong>de</strong>nces-services et aux c<strong>en</strong>tres d'accueil <strong>de</strong> jour pour personnes<br />

âgées et portant création du Conseil wallon du troisième âge (B.S.<br />

27/01/1999).<br />

GEGEVENS DIE VIA DE VI GERAPPORTEERD WORDEN (IMA)<br />

Het IMA (Intermutualistisch Ag<strong>en</strong>tschap) beschikt via <strong>de</strong> verzeker<strong>in</strong>gs<strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> (VI)<br />

over uitgebrei<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>formatie op <strong>in</strong>dividueel niveau. Hieron<strong>de</strong>r wor<strong>de</strong>n e<strong>en</strong> aantal<br />

variabel<strong>en</strong> die relevant kunn<strong>en</strong> zijn voor het on<strong>de</strong>rzoeksproject gerapporteerd.<br />

Gegev<strong>en</strong>s populatie (IMA)<br />

Nummer VI<br />

Geboortejaar<br />

Geslacht<br />

NIS-co<strong>de</strong><br />

KG1<br />

KG2<br />

Co<strong>de</strong> gerechtig<strong>de</strong> of persoon t<strong>en</strong> laste (titularis, echtg<strong>en</strong>o(o)t(e) of<br />

sam<strong>en</strong>won<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>, <strong>de</strong>sc<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt, asc<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt)<br />

Bijdragebetal<strong>en</strong>d / kosteloos (persoon t<strong>en</strong> laste, betaalt ge<strong>en</strong><br />

persoonlijke bijdrage, betaalt persoonlijke bijdrage, niet van toepass<strong>in</strong>g)<br />

Aard <strong>en</strong> bedrag <strong>in</strong>kom<strong>en</strong>s (n.v.t., persoon <strong>in</strong> het g<strong>en</strong>ot van<br />

bestaansm<strong>in</strong>imum of gelijkwaardig voor<strong>de</strong>el, persoon met e<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>kom<strong>en</strong><br />

< of = 12 maal het bestaansm<strong>in</strong>imum voor gez<strong>in</strong>shoof<strong>de</strong>n, person<strong>en</strong> die<br />

e<strong>en</strong> volledige bijdrage betal<strong>en</strong>, person<strong>en</strong> met e<strong>en</strong> jaarlijks belastbaar<br />

bruto-gez<strong>in</strong>s<strong>in</strong>kom<strong>en</strong> < 1.000.000 BEF, person<strong>en</strong> met <strong>in</strong>kom<strong>en</strong> <<br />

gr<strong>en</strong>sbedrag voor WIGW)<br />

Forfait B verpleegkundige zorg<strong>en</strong> (ja/ne<strong>en</strong>)<br />

Forfait C verpleegkundige zorg<strong>en</strong> (ja/ne<strong>en</strong>)<br />

K<strong>in</strong>esitherapie E of fysiotherapie (ja/ne<strong>en</strong>)<br />

Toelage voor <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>tegratie van gehandicapt<strong>en</strong>, cat. III of IV (ja/ne<strong>en</strong>)


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 131<br />

Toelage voor hulp aan ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>, cat. III, IV of V (ja/ne<strong>en</strong>)<br />

Uitker<strong>in</strong>g hulp aan <strong>de</strong>r<strong>de</strong>n (ja/ne<strong>en</strong>)<br />

Uitker<strong>in</strong>g voor primaire arbeidsongeschiktheid of <strong>in</strong>validiteitsuitker<strong>in</strong>g<br />

(ja/ne<strong>en</strong>)<br />

Forfaitaire uitker<strong>in</strong>g hulp aan <strong>de</strong>r<strong>de</strong>n (ja/ne<strong>en</strong>)<br />

Recht MAF gez<strong>in</strong> (sociale MAF, <strong>in</strong>kom<strong>en</strong>sMAF, fiscale MAF)<br />

Categorie MAF gez<strong>in</strong> (verhoog<strong>de</strong> tegemoetkom<strong>in</strong>g, tegemoetkom<strong>in</strong>g<br />

voor gehandicapt<strong>en</strong>, laag <strong>in</strong>kom<strong>en</strong>, beschei<strong>de</strong>n <strong>in</strong>kom<strong>en</strong>, fiscaal)<br />

Recht MAF <strong>in</strong>dividu (ge<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividueel recht, verhoog<strong>de</strong><br />

tegemoetkom<strong>in</strong>g, tegemoetkom<strong>in</strong>g voor gehandicapt<strong>en</strong>, verhoog<strong>de</strong><br />

k<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>rbijslag)<br />

Terugbetal<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> plafond gez<strong>in</strong> (ge<strong>en</strong> terugbetal<strong>in</strong>g, terugbetal<strong>in</strong>g op<br />

basis van plafond 450, terugbetal<strong>in</strong>g op basis van plafond 650)<br />

Terugbetal<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> plafond <strong>in</strong>dividu (ge<strong>en</strong> terugbetal<strong>in</strong>g, k<strong>in</strong>d m<strong>in</strong> 16 jaar<br />

plafond 650, k<strong>in</strong>d verhoog<strong>de</strong> k<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>rbijslag plafond 450)<br />

Datum recht MAF<br />

Recht op e<strong>en</strong> gewaarborgd <strong>in</strong>kom<strong>en</strong>, <strong>in</strong>kom<strong>en</strong>sgarantie voor ou<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong><br />

of op het leefloon (ja/ne<strong>en</strong>)<br />

Recht op toelage van gehandicapt<strong>en</strong> (ja/ne<strong>en</strong>)<br />

Recht op hulp van OCMW (ja/ne<strong>en</strong>)<br />

Facturer<strong>in</strong>gsgegev<strong>en</strong>s gezondheidszorg <strong>en</strong> Farmanet (VI s)<br />

De facturer<strong>in</strong>gsgegev<strong>en</strong>s gezondheidszorg <strong>en</strong> Farmanet zijn beschikbaar op het niveau<br />

van respectievelijk <strong>de</strong> nom<strong>en</strong>clatuurco<strong>de</strong> (van <strong>de</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eeskundige verstrekk<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>) <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong><br />

productco<strong>de</strong> (product <strong>en</strong> verpakk<strong>in</strong>g). Hier kan e<strong>en</strong> on<strong>de</strong>rscheid gemaakt wor<strong>de</strong>n<br />

tuss<strong>en</strong> ZIV-terugbetal<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> remgel<strong>de</strong>n <strong>en</strong>/of supplem<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong> op <strong>de</strong> betreff<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> co<strong>de</strong>s.<br />

Tev<strong>en</strong>s is ook <strong>de</strong> prestatiedatum van e<strong>en</strong> medische verstrekk<strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> aflever<strong>in</strong>gsdatum<br />

van e<strong>en</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l gek<strong>en</strong>d. Wat betreft <strong>de</strong> Farmanet-gegev<strong>en</strong>s di<strong>en</strong>t er echter<br />

voorbehoud gemaakt te wor<strong>de</strong>n daar niet alle aankop<strong>en</strong> van g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong> door dit<br />

systeem geregistreerd wor<strong>de</strong>n (b.v. product<strong>en</strong> aangeleverd door ziek<strong>en</strong>huisoffic<strong>in</strong>a s <strong>en</strong><br />

zog<strong>en</strong>aam<strong>de</strong> OTC-product<strong>en</strong>). On<strong>de</strong>rzoek dat <strong>en</strong>kel gebaseerd is op <strong>de</strong> Farmanetgegev<strong>en</strong>s<br />

zal dus het werkelijke verbruik <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> werkelijke kost<strong>en</strong> voor <strong>de</strong> bewoners<br />

on<strong>de</strong>rschatt<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Dankzij on<strong>de</strong>rstaan<strong>de</strong> forfaits is het voor IMA mogelijk om uit <strong>de</strong> populatiegegev<strong>en</strong>s <strong>de</strong><br />

<strong>rust</strong>huisbewoners te selecter<strong>en</strong>.


132 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

BESLUIT<br />

RVT-ROB-dagc<strong>en</strong>tra<br />

RVT<br />

ROB<br />

Forfait B5<br />

RVT Kat. C<br />

RVT Kat. Cd<br />

RVT forfait B4<br />

RVT palliatieve / RVT forfait arts<br />

KAT O<br />

KAT A<br />

KAT B<br />

KAT C<br />

ROB (niet erk<strong>en</strong>d)<br />

ROB KAT C<br />

ROB palliatief<br />

Dagc<strong>en</strong>tra : tegemoetkom<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> c<strong>en</strong>tra voor dagverzorg<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Uit dit overzicht blijkt dat <strong>de</strong> <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> on<strong>de</strong>rworp<strong>en</strong> zijn aan e<strong>en</strong> groot aantal<br />

politieke <strong>en</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istratieve overhe<strong>de</strong>n. De complexe Belgische staatsstructuur <strong>en</strong> meer<br />

specifiek <strong>de</strong> ge<strong>de</strong>el<strong>de</strong> fe<strong>de</strong>rale <strong>en</strong> regionale bevoegdhe<strong>de</strong>n betreff<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>rust</strong>huissector<br />

<strong>en</strong> hun bewoners geeft aanleid<strong>in</strong>g tot zowel e<strong>en</strong> duplicatie als tot e<strong>en</strong> versnipper<strong>in</strong>g van<br />

verplichte rapporter<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> aan <strong>de</strong> diverse overhe<strong>de</strong>n.<br />

In het ka<strong>de</strong>r van <strong>de</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istratieve vere<strong>en</strong>voudig<strong>in</strong>g zijn er wel reeds e<strong>en</strong> aantal aan te<br />

moedig<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong>itiatiev<strong>en</strong> g<strong>en</strong>om<strong>en</strong> om no<strong>de</strong>loze dubbele bevrag<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> of <strong>in</strong>specties te<br />

vermij<strong>de</strong>n. Zo is op fe<strong>de</strong>raal niveau <strong>de</strong> jaarlijkse statistische RVT-<strong>en</strong>quête van <strong>de</strong> FOD<br />

Volksgezondheid, Veiligheid van <strong>de</strong> Voedselket<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> Leefmilieu opgeschort omdat e<strong>en</strong><br />

groot aantal van <strong>de</strong> zak<strong>en</strong> die bevraagd wer<strong>de</strong>n <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong>ze <strong>en</strong>quête reeds gek<strong>en</strong>d zijn door<br />

bv. RIZIV, <strong>de</strong> Geme<strong>en</strong>schapp<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> Gewest<strong>en</strong> of <strong>de</strong> FOD Economie, KMO, Mid<strong>de</strong>nstand<br />

<strong>en</strong> Energie. De nieuwe <strong>en</strong>quête (<strong>in</strong> voorbereid<strong>in</strong>g) zal uitsluit<strong>en</strong>d betrekk<strong>in</strong>g hebb<strong>en</strong> op<br />

<strong>in</strong>formatie die door ge<strong>en</strong> an<strong>de</strong>re <strong>in</strong>stantie is <strong>in</strong>gezameld <strong>en</strong> zal meer gericht zijn op <strong>de</strong><br />

organisatorische aspect<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> het kwaliteitsbeleid van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Toch blijv<strong>en</strong> er nog steeds aanzi<strong>en</strong>lijke overlapp<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> bestaan <strong>en</strong> zijn e<strong>en</strong> groot aantal<br />

(voor <strong>de</strong>ze studie) relevante variabel<strong>en</strong> gek<strong>en</strong>d door <strong>de</strong> diverse overhe<strong>de</strong>n,<br />

overheids<strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> verzeker<strong>in</strong>gs<strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>. Vooral wat betreft<br />

<strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>gsk<strong>en</strong>merk<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> personeelsk<strong>en</strong>merk<strong>en</strong> lijk<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong>ze gegev<strong>en</strong>s zeer volledig te zijn.<br />

In het ka<strong>de</strong>r van dit on<strong>de</strong>rzoek di<strong>en</strong>t vermeld te wor<strong>de</strong>n dat belangrijke gegev<strong>en</strong>s op<br />

bewonersniveau (bv. ge<strong>de</strong>tailleer<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>dicatie van <strong>de</strong> gezondheidstoestand van <strong>de</strong><br />

bewoners <strong>en</strong> g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>consumptie die niet door Farmanet gecapteerd wordt) <strong>en</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>formatie betreff<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> het g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>distributieproces <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> kwaliteitsbewak<strong>in</strong>g<br />

ervan onmogelijk uit bestaan<strong>de</strong> gegev<strong>en</strong>sbronn<strong>en</strong> verzameld of afgeleid kunn<strong>en</strong> wor<strong>de</strong>n.<br />

Deze lacunes mak<strong>en</strong> e<strong>en</strong> uitgebreid veldon<strong>de</strong>rzoek onvermij<strong>de</strong>lijk om <strong>de</strong><br />

on<strong>de</strong>rzoeksvrag<strong>en</strong> op e<strong>en</strong> a<strong>de</strong>quate <strong>en</strong> wet<strong>en</strong>schappelijk verantwoor<strong>de</strong> wijze te kunn<strong>en</strong><br />

beantwoor<strong>de</strong>n.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 133<br />

BIJLAGE BIJ APPENDIX 2<br />

Jaarlijkse statistische RVT-<strong>en</strong>quête FOD Volksgezondheid, Veiligheid van <strong>de</strong> Voedselket<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong><br />

Leefmilieu<br />

De hieron<strong>de</strong>r gerapporteer<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>houd van <strong>de</strong>ze RVT-<strong>en</strong>quête heeft betrekk<strong>in</strong>g op <strong>de</strong><br />

<strong>en</strong>quêtes zoals die <strong>in</strong> het verle<strong>de</strong>n wer<strong>de</strong>n gebruikt om <strong>de</strong> <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> te bevrag<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> is<br />

niet langer actueel. De opsomm<strong>in</strong>g is gelimiteerd tot gegev<strong>en</strong>s die relevant kunn<strong>en</strong> zijn<br />

voor het on<strong>de</strong>rzoeksproject.<br />

1. I<strong>de</strong>ntificatie van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<br />

RIZIV-nummer<br />

Juridisch statuut<br />

Naam <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Postco<strong>de</strong> <strong>en</strong> geme<strong>en</strong>te<br />

Naam <strong>in</strong>richt<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> macht<br />

Postco<strong>de</strong> <strong>en</strong> geme<strong>en</strong>te<br />

2. K<strong>en</strong>merk<strong>en</strong> m.b.t. architectonische <strong>en</strong> f<strong>in</strong>anciële gegev<strong>en</strong>s<br />

Lokalisatie van <strong>de</strong> RVT-bed<strong>de</strong>n (apart/<strong>in</strong> <strong>rust</strong>huis/<strong>in</strong> ziek<strong>en</strong>huis)<br />

Afzon<strong>de</strong>rlijke e<strong>en</strong>heid<br />

Aantal bed<strong>de</strong>n RVT<br />

Aantal bed<strong>de</strong>n <strong>rust</strong>huis<br />

Aantal bed<strong>de</strong>n ziek<strong>en</strong>huis<br />

Dagverzorg<strong>in</strong>g : capaciteit, aantal gebruikers <strong>en</strong> aantal verblijfsdag<strong>en</strong><br />

Kort verblijf : capaciteit, aantal gebruikers <strong>en</strong> aantal verblijfsdag<strong>en</strong><br />

Supplem<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong><br />

o All-<strong>in</strong><br />

o Indi<strong>en</strong> ne<strong>en</strong>, welke zijn <strong>de</strong> supplem<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong>?<br />

Incont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>tiemateriaal<br />

L<strong>in</strong>n<strong>en</strong><br />

G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong><br />

Dr. Honoraria<br />

Kapper<br />

Pedicure<br />

An<strong>de</strong>re<br />

3. Gegev<strong>en</strong>s m.b.t. organisatie <strong>en</strong> werk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Aantal toelever<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> apothek<strong>en</strong> : privé / ziek<strong>en</strong>huis / bei<strong>de</strong>n<br />

Aantal arts<strong>en</strong> aangewez<strong>en</strong> door <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>richt<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> macht<br />

Aantal bezoek<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> huisarts<strong>en</strong><br />

Vrijwilligers (ja/ne<strong>en</strong>, aantal ur<strong>en</strong>)<br />

4. K<strong>en</strong>merk<strong>en</strong> m.b.t. het verpleg<strong>en</strong>d, verzorg<strong>en</strong>d <strong>en</strong> paramedisch personeel<br />

Aantal hoofdverpleegkundig<strong>en</strong> per diploma (gegradueer<strong>de</strong> vpk. +, gegradueer<strong>de</strong> vpk.,<br />

gebrevetteer<strong>de</strong> vpk., zh. assist<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong>)<br />

Aantal FTE hoofdverpleegkundig<strong>en</strong> per diploma (gegradueer<strong>de</strong> vpk. +, gegradueer<strong>de</strong><br />

vpk., gebrevetteer<strong>de</strong> vpk., zh. assist<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong>)<br />

Aantal verpleegkundig<strong>en</strong> (gegradueer<strong>de</strong> vpk. +, gegradueer<strong>de</strong> vpk., gebrevetteer<strong>de</strong> vpk.,<br />

zh. assist<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong>)<br />

Aantal FTE verpleegkundig<strong>en</strong> (gegradueer<strong>de</strong> vpk. +, gegradueer<strong>de</strong> vpk., gebrevetteer<strong>de</strong><br />

vpk., zh. assist<strong>en</strong>t<strong>en</strong>)<br />

Aantal verzorg<strong>en</strong>d personeel<br />

Aantal FTE verzorg<strong>en</strong>d personeel<br />

Aantal k<strong>in</strong>esist<strong>en</strong><br />

Aantal FTE k<strong>in</strong>esist<strong>en</strong><br />

Aantal ergotherapeut<strong>en</strong><br />

Aantal FTE ergotherapeut<strong>en</strong><br />

Aantal logopedist<strong>en</strong><br />

Aantal FTE logopedist<strong>en</strong><br />

Aantal sociaal personeel


134 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Aantal FTE sociaal personeel<br />

Aantal stagiairs werkzaam <strong>in</strong> het RVT<br />

o Stagiairs-verpleegkundig<strong>en</strong><br />

o Stagiairs-verzorg<strong>en</strong>d personeel<br />

o Stagiairs-k<strong>in</strong>e. <strong>en</strong> param. Personeel<br />

Aantal personeelsle<strong>de</strong>n per nacht (+ kwalificatie <strong>en</strong> bestemd voor?)<br />

5. Gegev<strong>en</strong>s m.b.t. <strong>de</strong> bewoners<br />

Aantal RVT-bewoners op 31/12 per leeftijdsklasse (-50 jaar; 50 t.e.m. 60 jaar; 61 t.e.m.<br />

70 jaar; 71 t.e.m. 80 jaar; 81 t.e.m. 90 jaar; 91 t.e.m. 100 jaar; +100 jaar) <strong>en</strong> geslacht<br />

Gemid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>de</strong> leeftijd van <strong>de</strong> bewoners per geslacht<br />

Aantal bewoners per zorgbehoeft<strong>en</strong>categorie (B, C, Cd), opgesplitst per geslacht<br />

Aantal opnames<br />

Herkomst bij opname (aantall<strong>en</strong>)<br />

o Thuis<br />

o Rusthuis<br />

o An<strong>de</strong>r RVT<br />

o Ziek<strong>en</strong>huis<br />

o Erg<strong>en</strong>s an<strong>de</strong>rs<br />

o Onbek<strong>en</strong>d<br />

Totaal aantal <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>itieve ontslag<strong>en</strong><br />

Bestemm<strong>in</strong>g na ontslag (aantall<strong>en</strong>)<br />

o Naar huis<br />

o Naar <strong>rust</strong>huis<br />

o An<strong>de</strong>r rvt<br />

o Naar ziek<strong>en</strong>huis<br />

o An<strong>de</strong>re bestemm<strong>in</strong>g<br />

o Onbek<strong>en</strong>d<br />

o Overle<strong>de</strong>n<br />

Aantal bewoners tij<strong>de</strong>lijk opg<strong>en</strong>om<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> het ziek<strong>en</strong>huis<br />

Bezett<strong>in</strong>gsgraad


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 135<br />

APPENDIX 3: SELECTIE RESIDENTEN IN ROB/RVT<br />

De gegev<strong>en</strong>s zijn afkomstig uit drie bestan<strong>de</strong>n voor het jaar 2004: <strong>de</strong> populatiegegev<strong>en</strong>s<br />

(k<strong>en</strong>merk<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> resi<strong>de</strong>nt<strong>en</strong>), Farmanet (ambulante g<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>) <strong>en</strong><br />

facturer<strong>in</strong>gsgegev<strong>en</strong>s, door het IMA aan het RIZIV/INAMI ter beschikk<strong>in</strong>g gesteld.<br />

De drie bestan<strong>de</strong>n kunn<strong>en</strong> met elkaar gekoppeld wor<strong>de</strong>n aan <strong>de</strong> hand van e<strong>en</strong><br />

i<strong>de</strong>ntificati<strong>en</strong>ummer van <strong>de</strong> patiënt. De resi<strong>de</strong>nt<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> e<strong>en</strong> ROB/RVT wer<strong>de</strong>n<br />

geselecteerd door <strong>de</strong> selectie van alle person<strong>en</strong> met gepresteer<strong>de</strong> uitgav<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> 2004<br />

voor pseudoco<strong>de</strong>s die verwijz<strong>en</strong> naar e<strong>en</strong> ROB- of RVT-forfait (zie tabel 1).<br />

Tabel 1 : Selectie pseudoco<strong>de</strong>s<br />

Categorie Pseudoco<strong>de</strong>s<br />

ROB O 763195, 763291<br />

ROB A 763210, 763313<br />

ROB B 763232, 763335<br />

ROB C 763254, 763350<br />

ROB Cd 763276, 763372<br />

RVT B 763033, 763114<br />

RVT C 763055, 763136<br />

RVT Cd 763070, 763151<br />

RVT Cc 763092, 763173<br />

Niet erk<strong>en</strong>d 741411<br />

Vervolg<strong>en</strong>s heeft het RIZIV/INAMI <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividuele gegev<strong>en</strong>s geaggregeerd tot op het<br />

niveau van <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> (ROB, ROB/RVT, RVT) <strong>en</strong> aan het <strong>KCE</strong> overgemaakt. Indi<strong>en</strong><br />

e<strong>en</strong> patiënt <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> loop van 2004 <strong>in</strong> meer<strong>de</strong>re <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> verbleef, werd zij toegewez<strong>en</strong><br />

aan <strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>stell<strong>in</strong>g met <strong>de</strong> hoogste uitgav<strong>en</strong> voor <strong>de</strong> co<strong>de</strong>s <strong>in</strong> tabel1.


136 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

APPENDIX 4: NATIONAL DATA ON<br />

PHARMACEUTICAL CONSUMPTION OF NURSING<br />

HOME RESIDENTS (FARMANET)<br />

All tables <strong>in</strong> App<strong>en</strong>dix 4 are based on Farmanet (ma<strong>de</strong> available by IMA and<br />

RIZIV/INAMI).<br />

Table A4.1 : Top 100 of drugs used <strong>in</strong> Belgian rest and nurs<strong>in</strong>g facilities,<br />

based on calculated DDDs.<br />

ATC Non-proprietary name DDD<br />

Health <strong>in</strong>surance<br />

cost ( )<br />

1 C01DX12 MOLSIDOMINE 10346605 3666181 843581<br />

2 A02BC01 OMEPRAZOL 6580042 4061590 908280<br />

3 C03CA01 FUROSEMIDE 5349921 580875 264653<br />

4 C01DA02 NITROGLYCERINE 5229171 2196152 514432<br />

5 C08CA01 AMLODIPINE 4701052 2285735 531982<br />

6 N06AB04 CITALOPRAM 3980098 2759236 1055847<br />

7 C09AA03 LISINOPRIL 3598074 732684 224749<br />

8 A02BA02 RANITIDINE 2928329 1465731 351167<br />

9 R05CB01 ACETYLCYSTEINE 2769150 328826 395995<br />

10 C03CA02 BUMETANIDE 2613340 314634 72914<br />

11 C03DA01 SPIRONOLACTON 2323722 857438 342685<br />

12 N06AB06 SERTRALINE 2219502 2151098 524880<br />

13 C03EA04 ALTIZIDE MET KALIUMSPARENDE MIDDELEN 2043440 343836 81065<br />

14 N06AB10 ESCITALOPRAM 1964088 1790218 440918<br />

15 H02AB04 METHYLPREDNISOLON 1904333 761748 73407<br />

16 N04BA02 LEVODOPA MET DECARBOXYLASEREMMER 1852161 1428546 351597<br />

17 B01AB06 NADROPARINE 1847711 3787019 713780<br />

18 B01AB05 ENOXAPARINE 1797405 3456816 689716<br />

19 C07AB07 BISOPROLOL 1768479 560757 196219<br />

20 N06AB05 PAROXETINE 1761320 1704212 403382<br />

21 C09AA04 PERINDOPRIL 1756380 1167768 281763<br />

22 H03AA01 LEVOTHYROXINE 1746660 150487 36770<br />

23 C10AA01 SIMVASTATINE 1693369 672099 119986<br />

24 C01AA05 DIGOXINE 1629942 70848 16625<br />

25 C01BD01 AMIODARON 1547272 267663 157457<br />

26 N07CA01 BETAHISTINE 1498568 86081 332545<br />

27 B01AC04 CLOPIDOGREL 1472968 2659393 429987<br />

28 R06AE07 CETIRIZINE 1457730 206087 312783<br />

29 N06AX05 TRAZODON 1447740 713682 399436<br />

30 A10AD01 HUMANE INSULINE 1412069 1441603 0<br />

31 C10AA05 ATORVASTATINE 1295532 810532 105162<br />

32 M05BA04 ALENDRONINEZUUR 1290604 1375538 177645<br />

33 A10BA02 METFORMINE 1271712 240509 4000<br />

34 R03AK03 FENOTEROL MET ANDERE MIDD. VOOR<br />

OBSTRUCT. AANDOENINGEN VD<br />

LUCHTWEGEN<br />

1264972 1099821 257631<br />

35 N05AX08 RISPERIDON 1237929 3996850 676510<br />

36 N06AX16 VENLAFAXINE 1229508 1610023 365127<br />

37 C09AA05 RAMIPRIL 1177792 357036 85310<br />

38 N02AX02 TRAMADOL 1131576 1329777 678981<br />

Out-of-pocket<br />

( )


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 137<br />

39 N05AH03 OLANZAPINE 1083985 4536708 471396<br />

40 C09AA01 CAPTOPRIL 1059526 352373 117484<br />

41 C07AB03 ATENOLOL 950345 218226 68450<br />

42 C08CA05 NIFEDIPINE 932259 452433 112572<br />

43 C03BA11 INDAPAMIDE 880760 123437 60707<br />

44 C07AA07 SOTALOL 811725 107948 62054<br />

45 R03AK06 SALMETEROL MET ANDERE MIDD. VOOR<br />

OBSTRUCT. AANDOENINGEN VD<br />

LUCHTWEGEN<br />

787350 1147941 176812<br />

46 G04BD04 OXYBUTYNINE 780008 51728 202123<br />

47 N06AX11 MIRTAZAPINE 779190 789534 193807<br />

48 J01CR02 AMOXICILLINE MET ENZYMREMMER 772107 838175 210319<br />

49 N06AB03 FLUOXETINE 758412 458481 120435<br />

50 M04AA01 ALLOPURINOL 750468 145508 35045<br />

51 C08DB01 DILTIAZEM 742564 386029 105187<br />

52 A10BB08 GLIQUIDON 741390 265833 0<br />

53 N06DA02 DONEPEZIL 735668 1974384 188440<br />

54 A10BB09 GLICLAZIDE 720845 306335 36187<br />

55 R03BB01 IPRATROPIUM BROMIDE 711103 299289 71447<br />

56 C09AA02 ENALAPRIL 708509 136713 36094<br />

57 C09CA01 LOSARTAN 682738 459770 92126<br />

58 C03EA01 HYDROCHLOORTHIAZIDE MET<br />

KALIUMSPARENDE MIDDELEN<br />

640496 71601 29193<br />

59 A02BC04 RABEPRAZOL 639758 1057575 252317<br />

60 R06AE09 LEVOCETIRIZINE 634880 140884 173327<br />

61 N02AB03 FENTANYL 617783 2562695 356400<br />

62 C02AC05 MOXONIDINE 599560 320281 76998<br />

63 N03AG01 VALPROINEZUUR 593766 935282 13<br />

64 C10AA03 PRAVASTATINE 549360 434908 42754<br />

65 R03DA04 THEOFYLLINE 532320 63994 14838<br />

66 C09CA04 IRBESARTAN 519372 285826 50663<br />

67 C09CA03 VALSARTAN 516852 241127 41911<br />

68 C07AB02 METOPROLOL 497601 177355 45283<br />

69 N05AD01 HALOPERIDOL 480025 254516 55831<br />

70 N05AX07 PROTHIPENDYL 479071 135622 32808<br />

71 C01AA08 METILDIGOXINE 457900 37008 8708<br />

72 C10AB05 FENOFIBRAAT 454636 99867 33275<br />

73 A02BC02 PANTOPRAZOL 454230 742088 132554<br />

74 J01XE02 NIFURTOINOL 449156 119077 27724<br />

75 M01AC01 PIROXICAM 436033 183079 111734<br />

76 N03AB02 FENYTOINE 435536 62787 0<br />

77 C09AA06 QUINAPRIL 419614 189239 38305<br />

78 C07AG02 CARVEDILOL 416426 335100 89253<br />

79 C08CA02 FELODIPINE 406920 114090 40747<br />

80 H03BB02 THIAMAZOL 395300 18965 4403<br />

81 C09CA06 CANDESARTAN 393008 148048 30715<br />

82 S01AA13 FUSIDINEZUUR 388938 27851 6564<br />

83 G03CA04 ESTRIOL 381090 76717 18415<br />

84 C03BA04 CHLOORTALIDON 378660 11692 2802<br />

85 B01AA07 ACENOCOUMAROL 363124 38516 9667<br />

86 A10BB12 GLIMEPIRIDE 352365 124384 0<br />

87 N06AA09 AMITRIPTYLINE 340114 79913 18797<br />

88 A03AB06 OTILONIUM BROMIDE 340030 48996 159349


138 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

89 C01BC03 PROPAFENON 336125 162538 39589<br />

90 S01ED01 TIMOLOL 335925 63388 16386<br />

91 N06DA04 GALANTAMINE 330533 883197 85737<br />

92 L02BA01 TAMOXIFEN 328279 236530 10<br />

93 J01DC02 CEFUROXIM 324234 481653 113855<br />

94 R03BA05 FLUTICASON 317018 241368 52077<br />

95 S01ED02 BETAXOLOL 313550 87414 21467<br />

96 M01AC06 MELOXICAM 312225 184420 43726<br />

97 A10BX02 REPAGLINIDE 303435 241582 0<br />

98 A10AC01 HUMANE INSULINE 302763 315796 0<br />

99 N03AF01 CARBAMAZEPINE 299190 139548 54382<br />

100 C07BB07 BISOPROLOL MET THIAZIDEN 285332 82754 31170


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 139<br />

C01DX<br />

Table A4.2 : Overview of the drugs prescribed <strong>in</strong> the ATC1 class of<br />

cardiovascular drugs. A lower boundary of 400,000 DDDs was used. For<br />

several drug classes, further <strong>de</strong>tails of the molecules used are provi<strong>de</strong>d. A<br />

cut-off of 10% of the market share based on DDD is used.<br />

ATC Class or non-proprietary name DDD<br />

Health<br />

<strong>in</strong>surance<br />

cost ( )<br />

Out-ofpocket<br />

( )<br />

OVERIGE VASODILATANTIA BIJ<br />

HARTZIEKTEN 10346605 3666181 843581<br />

C01DX12 MOLSIDOMINE 10346605 3666181 843581<br />

C09AA ACE-REMMERS, ENKELVOUDIG 8889274 3027213 805993<br />

% with<strong>in</strong><br />

drug<br />

class<br />

C09AA03 LISINOPRIL 3598074 732684 224749 40<br />

C09AA04 PERINDOPRIL 1756380 1167768 281763 20<br />

C09AA05 RAMIPRIL 1177792 357036 85310 13<br />

C09AA01 CAPTOPRIL 1059526 352373 117484 12<br />

C03CA SULFONAMIDEN 8015551 950378 350108<br />

C03CA01 FUROSEMIDE 5349921 580875 264653 67<br />

C03CA02 BUMETANIDE 2613340 314634 72914 33<br />

C08CA DIHYDROPYRIDINEDERIVATEN 6722495 3355252 805498<br />

C08CA01 AMLODIPINE 4701052 2285735 531982 70<br />

C08CA05 NIFEDIPINE 932259 452433 112572 14<br />

C01DA ORGANISCHE NITRATEN 5422761 2228674 522262<br />

C10AA<br />

C01DA02 NITROGLYCERINE 5229171 2196152 514432 96<br />

HMG-CoA REDUCTASEREMMERS<br />

(STATINES) 3710363 2014643 284464<br />

C10AA01 SIMVASTATINE 1693369 672099 119986 46<br />

C10AA05 ATORVASTATINE 1295532 810532 105162 35<br />

C10AA03 PRAVASTATINE 549360 434908 42754 15<br />

C07AB BETA-BLOKKERS, SELECTIEVE 3658144 1127417 367006<br />

C03EA<br />

C09CA<br />

C07AB07 BISOPROLOL 1768479 560757 196219 48<br />

C07AB03 ATENOLOL 950345 218226 68450 26<br />

C07AB02 METOPROLOL 497601 177355 45283 14<br />

"LOW-CEILING" DIURETICA MET K-<br />

SPARENDE MIDDELEN 2723808 421850 111825<br />

C03EA04 ALTIZIDE MET KALIUMSPARENDE MIDDELEN 2043440 343836 81065 75<br />

C03EA01<br />

HYDROCHLOORTHIAZIDE MET<br />

KALIUMSPARENDE MIDDELEN 640496 71601 29193 24<br />

ANGIOTENSINE-II-ANTAGONISTEN,<br />

ENKELVOUDIG 2511320 1336613 252344<br />

C09CA01 LOSARTAN 682738 459770 92126 27<br />

C09CA04 IRBESARTAN 519372 285826 50663 21<br />

C09CA03 VALSARTAN 516852 241127 41911 21<br />

C09CA06 CANDESARTAN 393008 148048 30715 16<br />

C09CA07 TELMISARTAN 280532 129822 20800 11<br />

C03DA ALDOSTERONANTAGONISTEN 2375153 968687 369222<br />

C03DA01 SPIRONOLACTON 2323722 857438 342685<br />

C01AA DIGITALISGLYCOSIDEN 2171642 110224 25913<br />

C01AA05 DIGOXINE 1629942 70848 16625 75<br />

C01AA08 METILDIGOXINE 457900 37008 8708 21<br />

C01BD ANTI-ARITMICA (KLASSE III) 1547272 267663 157457<br />

C01BD01 AMIODARON 1547272 267663 157457<br />

C03BA SULFONAMIDEN 1259420 135129 63509<br />

C03BA11 INDAPAMIDE 880760 123437 60707 70<br />

C03BA04 CHLOORTALIDON 378660 11692 2802 30


140 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

C07AA BETA-BLOKKERS, NIET-SELECTIEVE 1097932 187939 83922<br />

C02AC<br />

C07AA07 SOTALOL 811725 107948 62054<br />

C07AA05 PROPRANOLOL 255874 71328 19731<br />

IMIDAZOLINE-<br />

RECEPTORAGONISTEN 782500 372261 89348<br />

C02AC05 MOXONIDINE 599560 320281 76998 77<br />

C08DB BENZOTHIAZEPINEDERIVATEN 742564 386029 105187<br />

C10AB FIBRATEN 605596 159348 48078<br />

C01BC ANTI-ARITMICA (KLASSE IC) 502520 277378 99255<br />

C01BC03 PROPAFENON 336125 162538 39589 67<br />

C01BC04 FLECAINIDE 166395 114840 59666 33<br />

C09BA ACE-REMMERS MET DIURETICA 444780 260318 64135<br />

C07AG ALFA- EN BETA-BLOKKERS 421314 338724 90134


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 141<br />

Table A4.3 : Overview of the drugs prescribed <strong>in</strong> the ATC1 class of drugs for<br />

the neural system. A lower boundary of 400,000 DDDs was used. For<br />

several drug classes, further <strong>de</strong>tails of the molecules used are provi<strong>de</strong>d. A<br />

cut-off of 10% of the market share based on DDD was used.<br />

ATC Class or non-proprietary name DDD<br />

N06AB<br />

Health<br />

<strong>in</strong>surance<br />

cost ( )<br />

Out-ofpocket<br />

( )<br />

SELECTIEVE SEROTONINE-<br />

HEROPNAMEREMMERS 10747890 8904211 2561419<br />

% with<strong>in</strong><br />

drug class<br />

N06AB04 CITALOPRAM 3980098 2759236 1055847 37<br />

N06AB06 SERTRALINE 2219502 2151098 524880 21<br />

N06AB10 ESCITALOPRAM 1964088 1790218 440918 18<br />

N06AB05 PAROXETINE 1761320 1704212 403382 16<br />

N06AX OVERIGE ANTIDEPRESSIVA 3698526 3284548 999764<br />

N06AX05 TRAZODON 1447740 713682 399436 39<br />

N06AX16 VENLAFAXINE 1229508 1610023 365127 33<br />

N06AX11 MIRTAZAPINE 779190 789534 193807 21<br />

N04BA DOPA EN DERIVATEN<br />

OVERIGE ANTIPSYCHOTICA<br />

1858250 1455835 354903<br />

N05AX (NEUROLEPTICA) 1833865 4166492 716872<br />

N05AX08 RISPERIDON 1237929 3996850 676510 68<br />

N05AX07 PROTHIPENDYL 479071 135622 32808 26<br />

N07CA ANTIVERTIGO PREPARATEN 1498568 86081 332545<br />

N07CA01 BETAHISTINE 1498568 86081 332545<br />

N02AX OVERIGE OPIOIDEN 1430572 1649141 793659<br />

N02AX02 TRAMADOL 1131576 1329777 678981 79<br />

N02AX01 TILIDINE 244404 269266 64598 17<br />

N05AH DIAZEPINEN, OXAZEPINEN EN THIAZEPINEN 1278495 5227852 532350<br />

N05AH03 OLANZAPINE 1083985 4536708 471396 85<br />

N05AH04 QUETIAPINE 158940 600943 40697 12<br />

N06DA CHOLINESTERASEREMMERS 1270223 3459896 346329<br />

N06DA02 DONEPEZIL 735668 1974384 188440 58<br />

N06DA04 GALANTAMINE 330533 883197 85737 26<br />

N06DA03 RIVASTIGMINE 204022 602315 72152 16<br />

N05AD BUTYROFENONDERIVATEN 933346 537184 120778<br />

N05AD01 HALOPERIDOL 480025 254516 55831 51<br />

N05AD05 PIPAMPERON 208712 90576 20649 22<br />

N05AD03 MELPERON 143149 140511 32957 15<br />

N06AA<br />

NIET-SELECTIEVE MONOAMINE-<br />

HEROPNAMEREMMERS 690947 209213 49328<br />

N06AA09 AMITRIPTYLINE 340114 79913 18797 49<br />

N06AA16 DOSULEPINE 144720 57500 13538 21<br />

N06AA04 CLOMIPRAMINE 94406 40725 9761 14<br />

N02AB FENYLPIPERIDINEDERIVATEN 617984 2562995 356468<br />

N02AB03 FENTANYL 617783 2562695 356400<br />

N03AG VETZUURDERIVATEN 599757 955955 13<br />

N03AG01 VALPROINEZUUR 593766 935282 13<br />

N03AB HYDANTOINEDERIVATEN 463186 66836 0<br />

N03AB02 FENYTOINE 435536 62787 0<br />

N04AA TERTIAIRE AMINEN 425068 78731 17451<br />

N04AA08 DEXETIMIDE 229040 33646 7434 54<br />

N04AA04 PROCYCLIDINE 73380 16585 3709 17<br />

N04AA02 BIPERIDEEN 71628 17450 3933 17<br />

N04AA01 TRIHEXYFENIDYL 51020 11049 2375 12


142 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Table A4.4 : Overview of the drugs prescribed <strong>in</strong> the ATC1 class of drugs for<br />

the gastro<strong>in</strong>test<strong>in</strong>al system. A lower boundary of 50,000 DDDs was used.<br />

For several drug classes, further <strong>de</strong>tails of the molecules used are provi<strong>de</strong>d.<br />

A cut-off of 10% of the market share based on DDD was used.<br />

ATC Class or non-proprietary name DDD<br />

Health<br />

<strong>in</strong>surance<br />

cost ( )<br />

Out-ofpocket<br />

( )<br />

A02BC INHIBITOREN VAN DE PROTONPOMP 8027236 6414726 1382747<br />

% with<strong>in</strong><br />

drug<br />

class<br />

A02BC01 OMEPRAZOL 6580042 4061590 908280 82<br />

A02BC04 RABEPRAZOL 639758 1057575 252317 8<br />

A02BA H2-RECEPTORBLOKKERENDE MIDDELEN 2944330 1475664 353683<br />

A02BA02 RANITIDINE 2928329 1465731 351167<br />

A10BB SULFONYLUREUMDERIVATEN 2020750 782432 36187<br />

A10BB08 GLIQUIDON 741390 265833 0 37<br />

A10BB09 GLICLAZIDE 720845 306335 36187 36<br />

A10BB12 GLIMEPIRIDE 352365 124384 0 17<br />

MIDDELLANGWERKENDE MET SNELWERKENDE<br />

A10AD INSULINES 1426881 1457781 0<br />

A10BA BIGUANIDEN 1271712 240509 4000<br />

A10BA02 METFORMINE 1271712 240509 4000<br />

A03AB<br />

SYNTHETISCHE ANTICHOLINERGICA,<br />

KWATERNAIRE AMMONIUMVERBINDINGEN 363029 50840 165060<br />

A03AB06 OTILONIUM BROMIDE 340030 48996 159349<br />

A10BX OVERIGE ORALE HYPOGLYKEMIERENDE MIDDELEN 303435 241582 0<br />

A10BX02 REPAGLINIDE 303435 241582 0<br />

MIDDELLANGWERKENDE INSULINES EN<br />

A10AC ANALOGEN 302763 315796 0<br />

A10AB SNELWERKENDE INSULINES EN ANALOGEN<br />

SYNTHETISCHE PARASYMPATHICOLYTICA, ESTERS<br />

272775 284144 0<br />

A03AA MET TERTIAIRE AMINOGROEP 269154 12926 50054<br />

A03AA04 MEBEVERINE 269154 12926 50054<br />

A07EC MESALAZINE EN VERWANTE VERBINDINGEN 179365 156631 39312<br />

A07EC02 MESALAZINE 131540 136336 34580<br />

A06AD OSMOTISCH WERKENDE LAXANTIA 63379 10404 2380


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 143<br />

Table A4.5 : Overview of the drugs prescribed <strong>in</strong> the ATC1 class of drugs for<br />

the respiratory system. A lower boundary of 50,000 DDDs was used. For<br />

several drug classes, further <strong>de</strong>tails of the molecules used are provi<strong>de</strong>d. A<br />

cut-off of 10% of the market share based on DDD was used.<br />

ATC Class or non-proprietary name DDD<br />

Health<br />

<strong>in</strong>surance<br />

cost ( )<br />

Out-ofpocket<br />

( )<br />

R05CB MUCOLYTICA 2815731 419322 417250<br />

R05CB01 ACETYLCYSTEINE 2769150 328826 395995<br />

R03AK<br />

SYMPATHICOMIMETICA MET ANDERE MIDD.<br />

VOOR COPD 2504037 2966200 577482<br />

% with<strong>in</strong><br />

drug<br />

class<br />

R03AK03 FENOTEROL + 1264972 1099821 257631 51<br />

R03AK06 SALMETEROL + 787350 1147941 176812 31<br />

R03AK04 SALBUTAMOL + 256835 383443 90131 10<br />

R03AK07 FORMOTEROL + 194880 334994 52908 8<br />

R06AE PIPERAZINEDERIVATEN 2092610 346972 486109<br />

R06AE07 CETIRIZINE 1457730 206087 312783 70<br />

R06AE09 LEVOCETIRIZINE 634880 140884 173327 30<br />

R03BB PARASYMPATHICOLYTICA 944108 611745 129195<br />

R03BB01 IPRATROPIUM BROMIDE 711103 299289 71447 75<br />

R03BB04 TIOTROPIUM BROMIDE 209700 305585 56175 22<br />

R06AX<br />

OVERIGE ANTIHISTAMINICA VOOR<br />

SYSTEMISCH GEBRUIK 652105 148996 173108<br />

R06AX13 LORATADINE 119896 17238 31008<br />

R03BA GLUCOCORTICOIDEN 635707 674015 156106<br />

R03BA05 FLUTICASON 317018 241368 52077 50<br />

R03BA02 BUDESONIDE 226502 360486 86769 36<br />

R03BA01 BECLOMETASON 92188 72161 17260 15<br />

R03DA XANTHINEDERIVATEN 532608 64031 14848<br />

R03DA04 THEOFYLLINE 532320 63994 14838<br />

R03AC SELECTIEVE BETA-2-SYMPATHICOMIMETICA 414670 279698 65631<br />

R03AC02 SALBUTAMOL 181985 56639 13354 44<br />

R03AC12 SALMETEROL 52680 49559 11308 13<br />

R03AC13 FORMOTEROL 179955 173495 40968 43<br />

R01AD CORTICOSTEROIDEN 266231 97912 23700<br />

R01AD08 FLUTICASON 112163 44086 10714 42<br />

R01AD09 MOMETASON 106505 41892 10148 40<br />

R01AD05 BUDESONIDE 33228 8036 1897 12<br />

R03DC LEUKOTRIEENRECEPTORANTAGONISTEN 170218 207544 48037<br />

R03DC03 MONTELUKAST 125642 158936 36732 74<br />

R03DC01 ZAFIRLUKAST 44576 48608 11305 26<br />

R03BC<br />

ANTI-ALLERGISCHE MIDDELEN, EXCL.<br />

CORTICOSTEROIDEN 57346 44117 25777<br />

R03BC01 CROMOGLICINEZUUR 57346 44117 25777<br />

R03CC SELECTIEVE BETA-2-SYMPATHICOMIMETICA 51887 17648 3939<br />

R03CC11 TULOBUTEROL 29170 8573 1922 56<br />

R03CC03 TERBUTALINE 15348 6436 1448 30


144 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

APPENDIX 5: GEOGRAPHICAL VARIATION OF<br />

PHARMACEUTICAL CONSUMPTION OF NURSING<br />

HOME RESIDENTS IN BELGIUM


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 145


146 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 147


148 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 149


150 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

APPENDIX 6: SEARCH STRATEGY OF THE<br />

LITERATURE REVIEW<br />

To limit the output to the appropriate sett<strong>in</strong>g of nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes, we <strong>de</strong>veloped the<br />

follow<strong>in</strong>g profile:<br />

Home for the el<strong>de</strong>rly<br />

o ("Homes for the Aged"[MESH] OR ("Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes"[MESH]<br />

AND ("Aged"[MESH] OR "Geriatrics"[MeSH])))<br />

We constructed search profiles for each of the five follow<strong>in</strong>g concepts:<br />

Institutional characteristics<br />

o Health Services Research OR Health Facility Size OR Health<br />

Manpower OR Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Staff OR Personnel Staff<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Schedul<strong>in</strong>g OR Health Facilities, Proprietary OR Privacy OR<br />

Paternalism OR Pati<strong>en</strong>t Participation OR Population<br />

Dynamics<br />

Needs of resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

o Needs Assessm<strong>en</strong>t OR Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Assessm<strong>en</strong>t OR Geriatric<br />

Assessm<strong>en</strong>t OR Diagnosis-Related Groups<br />

Medication usage<br />

o Drug Therapy OR Drug Utilization OR Economics,<br />

Pharmaceutical OR Drug Costs OR Insurance,<br />

pharmaceutical services OR Community Pharmacy Services<br />

OR Pharmacy Services, Hospital OR Pharmacology, Cl<strong>in</strong>ical<br />

OR Drug Utilisation[Free text]<br />

Medication Managem<strong>en</strong>t Systems<br />

o Pharmaceutical Services OR Drug Delivery Systems OR<br />

Community Pharmacy Services OR Medication Systems OR<br />

Medication Errors OR Insurance, Pharmaceutical Services<br />

OR Pharmacy Services, Hospital<br />

Quality of care<br />

o Quality Indicators, Health Care OR Quality Assurance, Health<br />

Care OR Total Quality Managem<strong>en</strong>t OR Utilization Review<br />

OR Pati<strong>en</strong>t Care Managem<strong>en</strong>t OR Managem<strong>en</strong>t Quality<br />

Circles OR Pati<strong>en</strong>t care team<br />

Each of the five concepts was th<strong>en</strong> comb<strong>in</strong>ed with the profile for the nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.<br />

The same strategy was repeated (with adaptation of the keywords, wh<strong>en</strong> appropriate)<br />

<strong>in</strong><br />

International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA) from Thomson<br />

Corporation<br />

Embase (Elseviers Publishers)<br />

The databases were searched from 1995 to date.<br />

The recall of this search strategy (more than 2000 articles) was th<strong>en</strong> scre<strong>en</strong>ed on the<br />

basis of the abstract to select 200 relevant articles by two reviewers (Verrue M and<br />

Bauw<strong>en</strong>s M), who discussed their selections among each other until cons<strong>en</strong>sus was<br />

reached. These articles were read <strong>in</strong> full text and a search of the cited refer<strong>en</strong>ces was<br />

carried out to i<strong>de</strong>ntify other articles which might not have be<strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong>tected by the search<br />

strategy. A selection of 40 publications, consi<strong>de</strong>red highly relevant by the two<br />

reviewers, was used as the start<strong>in</strong>g po<strong>in</strong>t for a f<strong>in</strong>ish<strong>in</strong>g search cycle us<strong>in</strong>g the Sci<strong>en</strong>ce


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 151<br />

Citation In<strong>de</strong>x (the Institute of Sci<strong>en</strong>tific Information) through Web of Sci<strong>en</strong>ce, and the<br />

related articles algorithm <strong>in</strong> PUBMED. The f<strong>in</strong>al selection of relevant publications<br />

(175) is listed <strong>in</strong> the refer<strong>en</strong>ce list.


152 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

APPENDIX 7: INSTRUMENTS FOR THE<br />

ASSESSMENT OF FUNCTIONAL STATUS OF<br />

RESIDENTS AND QUALITY OF CARE IN NURSING<br />

HOMES<br />

RESOURCE UTILIZATION GROUPS VERSION III (RUG-III)<br />

RUG-III classifies a resi<strong>de</strong>nt <strong>in</strong>to one of 44 dist<strong>in</strong>ct groups. The system <strong>in</strong>corporates<br />

three dim<strong>en</strong>sions <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong>scrib<strong>in</strong>g and group<strong>in</strong>g a resi<strong>de</strong>nt.<br />

The first dim<strong>en</strong>sion is repres<strong>en</strong>ted by sev<strong>en</strong> major cl<strong>in</strong>ical categories. These categories<br />

are <strong>de</strong>vised as a hierarchy with <strong>de</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g cost <strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong>sity:<br />

special rehabilitation: resi<strong>de</strong>nts receiv<strong>in</strong>g differ<strong>en</strong>t <strong>de</strong>grees of physical,<br />

occupational, or speech therapy<br />

ext<strong>en</strong>sive services: resi<strong>de</strong>nts with respirator/v<strong>en</strong>tilator care, par<strong>en</strong>teral<br />

feed<strong>in</strong>g suction<strong>in</strong>g, or tracheostomy<br />

special care: e.g. resi<strong>de</strong>nts with burns, coma, multiple sclerosis,<br />

pressure ulcers stage 3 or 4, quadriplegia, septicaemia, IV medications,<br />

or tube feed<strong>in</strong>g<br />

cl<strong>in</strong>ically complex: e.g. resi<strong>de</strong>nts with aphasia, cerebral palsy,<br />

<strong>de</strong>hydration, hemiplegia, pneumonia, static ulcer, term<strong>in</strong>al illness,<br />

ur<strong>in</strong>ary tract <strong>in</strong>fection, dialysis, or four or more physician visits per<br />

month<br />

impaired cognition: e.g. resi<strong>de</strong>nts with impaired <strong>de</strong>cision-mak<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

ori<strong>en</strong>tation problems, short-term memory problems<br />

behaviour problems: e.g. resi<strong>de</strong>nts with physical abuse, verbal abuse, or<br />

wan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>in</strong>g<br />

reduced physical functions: resi<strong>de</strong>nts who do not meet the conditions<br />

of earlier categories .<br />

The second dim<strong>en</strong>sion, used to subdivi<strong>de</strong> the major categories, is based on an ADL<br />

(Activities of Daily Liv<strong>in</strong>g) In<strong>de</strong>x, a summary measure of functional capability <strong>in</strong> four<br />

ADLs: bed mobility, transfers, eat<strong>in</strong>g and toilet use.<br />

The ADL In<strong>de</strong>x ranges from 4 to 18, the lowest value (4) <strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nce <strong>in</strong> all<br />

four ADLs, and the highest value total <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy <strong>in</strong> these same four ADLs.<br />

The third dim<strong>en</strong>sion forms tertiary splits <strong>in</strong> the classification and <strong>in</strong>corporates particular<br />

services; rehabilitation provi<strong>de</strong>d by nurses, or problems, pres<strong>en</strong>ce of <strong>de</strong>pression.<br />

Depression is used as tertiary splits <strong>in</strong> the cl<strong>in</strong>ically complex'' category, and nurs<strong>in</strong>g<br />

rehabilitation'' as tertiary splits <strong>in</strong> impaired cognition'', behaviour problems'' and<br />

reduced physical functions''.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 153<br />

DUTCH CARE DEPENDENCY SCALE<br />

The CDS provi<strong>de</strong>s a framework for the care <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy status of <strong>in</strong>stitutionalized<br />

el<strong>de</strong>rly people. The CDS measures 15 human needs. For example, the response<br />

alternatives of the item eat<strong>in</strong>g and dr<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g are:<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nt is unable to take food and dr<strong>in</strong>k<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nt is unable to prepare food and dr<strong>in</strong>k unai<strong>de</strong>d; resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able<br />

to put food and dr<strong>in</strong>k <strong>in</strong>to his/her mouth<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to prepare and put food and dr<strong>in</strong>k <strong>in</strong>to his/her mouth<br />

unai<strong>de</strong>d with supervision; has difficulty <strong>de</strong>term<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g quantity<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to eat and dr<strong>in</strong>k unai<strong>de</strong>d with some supervision<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to prepare meals and to satisfy his/her need for food<br />

and dr<strong>in</strong>k unai<strong>de</strong>d<br />

The care <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy is assessed on a five-po<strong>in</strong>t Likertscale. Nurses rated all items by<br />

select<strong>in</strong>g one criterion out of the five criteria.<br />

A CDS sum-score can be computed by add<strong>in</strong>g the item score of the 15 items. The<br />

theoretical range for the CDS sum-score will be from 15 to 75. Low scores on the scale<br />

items <strong>in</strong>dicate that the pati<strong>en</strong>t is completely <strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt on care; high scores <strong>in</strong>dicate<br />

that the pati<strong>en</strong>t is almost <strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>p<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt of care.<br />

Care Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>ncy Scale items and item <strong>de</strong>scriptions<br />

1. Eat<strong>in</strong>g/dr<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to satisfy his/her<br />

need for food and dr<strong>in</strong>k<br />

2. Incont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>ce The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to control the<br />

discharge of ur<strong>in</strong>e and faeces voluntarily<br />

3. Body posture The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to adopt a position<br />

appropriate to a certa<strong>in</strong> activity<br />

4. Mobility The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to move about<br />

unai<strong>de</strong>d<br />

5. Day/night pattern The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> an<br />

appropriate day/night cycle unai<strong>de</strong>d<br />

6. Gett<strong>in</strong>g (un)dressed The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to get dressed and<br />

undressed unai<strong>de</strong>d<br />

7. Body temperature The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to protect his/her<br />

body temperature aga<strong>in</strong>st external <strong>in</strong>flu<strong>en</strong>ces unai<strong>de</strong>d<br />

8. Hygi<strong>en</strong>e The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to take care of<br />

his/her personal hygi<strong>en</strong>e unai<strong>de</strong>d<br />

9. Avoidance of danger The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to assure his/her<br />

own safety unai<strong>de</strong>d<br />

10. Communication The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to communicate<br />

11. Contact with others The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to appropriately<br />

make, ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> and <strong>en</strong>d social contacts<br />

12. S<strong>en</strong>se of rules/values The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to observe rules by<br />

him/herself<br />

13. Daily activities The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to structure daily<br />

activities with<strong>in</strong> the facility unai<strong>de</strong>d<br />

14. Recreational activities The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to participate <strong>in</strong><br />

activities outsi<strong>de</strong> the facility unai<strong>de</strong>d<br />

15. Learn<strong>in</strong>g ability The ext<strong>en</strong>t to which the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is able to acquire<br />

knowledge and/or skills and/or to reta<strong>in</strong> that which was<br />

previously learned unai<strong>de</strong>d


154 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

FUNCTIONAL AUTONOMY MEASUREMENT SYSTEM (PROVINCE OF<br />

QUEBEC, CANADA)<br />

The SMAF (Système <strong>de</strong> mesure <strong>de</strong> l autonomie fonctionnelle) is a 29-item scale<br />

<strong>de</strong>veloped accord<strong>in</strong>g to the WHO classification of disabilities. It measures functional<br />

ability <strong>in</strong> five areas: ADL (7 items), mobility (6 items), communication (3 items), m<strong>en</strong>tal<br />

functions (5 items) and IADL (8 items). Each item is scored on a 5-po<strong>in</strong>t scale for a<br />

maximum total score of 87. An <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the score repres<strong>en</strong>ts a <strong>de</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> functional<br />

ability. Its reliability and validity have be<strong>en</strong> tested <strong>in</strong> several studies.<br />

The ISO-SMAF classification leads to the i<strong>de</strong>ntification of 14 profiles based on the<br />

results on the 5 dim<strong>en</strong>sions of the SMAF scale. These ISO-SMAF profiles can be<br />

grouped <strong>in</strong>to four broad categories: IADL disabilities only, mobility problems<br />

predom<strong>in</strong>ant, m<strong>en</strong>tal problems predom<strong>in</strong>ant, severe and mixed disabilities.<br />

These ISO-SMAF profiles are associated with a specific amount of nurs<strong>in</strong>g and support<br />

services. They are also associated with costs of services accord<strong>in</strong>g to the type of<br />

dwell<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

The ma<strong>in</strong> objective of Tousignant M et al. (2003) was to apply the ISOSMAF<br />

classification to fund<strong>in</strong>g long-term care facilities. The second objective was to compare<br />

the results of this new fund<strong>in</strong>g methodology with the formal methods <strong>in</strong> use <strong>in</strong> the<br />

Prov<strong>in</strong>ce of Quebec. The results show that fund<strong>in</strong>g the facilities based on the severity of<br />

the disabilities of their resi<strong>de</strong>nts <strong>in</strong> regard to functional autonomy highlights the un<strong>de</strong>rfund<strong>in</strong>g<br />

of a facility wh<strong>en</strong> compared to the usual fund<strong>in</strong>g methodology based on the<br />

number of beds and hours of care.<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g the ISO-SMAF profiles, it is possible to establish a picture of the facility <strong>in</strong> terms<br />

of the case-mix of resi<strong>de</strong>nts. From this picture, adm<strong>in</strong>istrators, <strong>de</strong>cisionmakers or<br />

admission regulation boards can compare the disability profile of the resi<strong>de</strong>nts of a<br />

specific facility to the others, or the facility to the area.<br />

THE RESIDENT ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENT FOR NURSING HOMES<br />

(RAI)<br />

The Resi<strong>de</strong>nt Assessm<strong>en</strong>t Instrum<strong>en</strong>t (RAI) is a method for compreh<strong>en</strong>sive functional<br />

assessm<strong>en</strong>t of nurs<strong>in</strong>g home resi<strong>de</strong>nts, with the object to gui<strong>de</strong> the <strong>de</strong>velopm<strong>en</strong>t of<br />

<strong>in</strong>dividualized care plans. It is of course an <strong>in</strong>strum<strong>en</strong>t for the assessm<strong>en</strong>t of the<br />

functional status of <strong>in</strong>dividual resi<strong>de</strong>nts but is also an <strong>in</strong>strum<strong>en</strong>t to assess the nature<br />

and quality of all the relevant processes of care with<strong>in</strong> an <strong>in</strong>stitution to assess their<br />

quality improvem<strong>en</strong>t performance and plans.<br />

RAI consists of:<br />

a M<strong>in</strong>imum Data Set (MDS)<br />

an i<strong>de</strong>ntification of problem areas<br />

specific Resi<strong>de</strong>nt Assessm<strong>en</strong>t Protocols (RAPs)<br />

a user s manual<br />

The MDS is a core of assessm<strong>en</strong>t items that provi<strong>de</strong>s a compreh<strong>en</strong>sive picture of each<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt s functional, cognitive and emotional status and a variety of other areas,<br />

<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g resi<strong>de</strong>nt s str<strong>en</strong>gths, prefer<strong>en</strong>ces and needs. The full MDS assessm<strong>en</strong>t is<br />

repeated yearly. In addition, a quarterly review is done with a subset of MDS<br />

assessm<strong>en</strong>t items.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 155<br />

M<strong>in</strong>imum Data Set items (MDS)<br />

Background and customary rout<strong>in</strong>es<br />

Communication hear<strong>in</strong>g patterns<br />

Physical function<strong>in</strong>g and structural problems<br />

Mood and behaviour patterns<br />

Disease diagnoses<br />

Oral nutritional status<br />

Sk<strong>in</strong> condition<br />

Special treatm<strong>en</strong>ts and procedures<br />

Cognitive patterns<br />

Vision patterns<br />

Cont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>ce<br />

Activity pursuit patterns<br />

Health conditions<br />

Oral <strong>de</strong>ntal status<br />

Medication use<br />

Problem areas are i<strong>de</strong>ntified by apply<strong>in</strong>g a set of algorithms to a resi<strong>de</strong>nt s MDS data<br />

that will suggest problems, risks for <strong>de</strong>velopm<strong>en</strong>t of a problem, or pot<strong>en</strong>tials for<br />

improved function.<br />

The 18 condition-focused RAPs specify additional assessm<strong>en</strong>t of i<strong>de</strong>ntified problem<br />

areas <strong>in</strong> the resi<strong>de</strong>nt s status. The protocols are <strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>d to more directly l<strong>in</strong>k the MDS<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation to care plan <strong>de</strong>cisions. Facility staff th<strong>en</strong> use the more specialized<br />

assessm<strong>en</strong>t gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es found <strong>in</strong> the RAPs to i<strong>de</strong>ntify pot<strong>en</strong>tially treatable causes and<br />

focus <strong>de</strong>cisions about the resi<strong>de</strong>nt s plan of care and services.<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nt Assessm<strong>en</strong>t Protocols (RAPs)<br />

Delirium<br />

Visual function<br />

ADL functional rehabilitative pot<strong>en</strong>tial<br />

Psychosocial well-be<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Behaviour problem<br />

Falls<br />

Feed<strong>in</strong>g tubes<br />

D<strong>en</strong>tal care<br />

Psychotropic drugs<br />

Cognitive loss <strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>tia<br />

Communication<br />

Ur<strong>in</strong>ary <strong>in</strong>cont<strong>in</strong><strong>en</strong>ce and <strong>in</strong>dwell<strong>in</strong>g catheter<br />

Mood state<br />

Activities


156 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Nutritional status<br />

Dehydration fluid ma<strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong>ance<br />

Pressure ulcers<br />

Physical restra<strong>in</strong>ts<br />

The user s manual provi<strong>de</strong>s <strong>de</strong>tailed specifications about how to complete the MDS and<br />

RAP assessm<strong>en</strong>t process (e.g. <strong>in</strong>terview<strong>in</strong>g staff, resi<strong>de</strong>nts and family members,<br />

review<strong>in</strong>g records), and conta<strong>in</strong>s item <strong>de</strong>f<strong>in</strong>itions, examples of cod<strong>in</strong>g options and<br />

cl<strong>in</strong>ical gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es for us<strong>in</strong>g the RAPs to <strong>de</strong>velop care plans.<br />

While the Resi<strong>de</strong>nt Assessm<strong>en</strong>t Instrum<strong>en</strong>t (RAI) was orig<strong>in</strong>ally <strong>de</strong>signed as a<br />

multidim<strong>en</strong>sional assessm<strong>en</strong>t tool aimed at improv<strong>in</strong>g cl<strong>in</strong>ical practice, it can also<br />

provi<strong>de</strong> the foundation for a compreh<strong>en</strong>sive data base that can be used to assess and<br />

monitor the quality of care. Us<strong>in</strong>g data from four sites (<strong>in</strong> D<strong>en</strong>mark, Iceland, Italy and<br />

the USA) and eight <strong>in</strong>dicators of quality that could be <strong>de</strong>rived from s<strong>in</strong>gle assessm<strong>en</strong>ts,<br />

Howes et al. (1997) <strong>de</strong>monstrated how quality might be measured and compared us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

the RAI. They did show how this data base can provi<strong>de</strong> <strong>in</strong>valuable <strong>in</strong>formation to<br />

provi<strong>de</strong>rs about the quality of care with<strong>in</strong> their facilities. It can also allow consumers<br />

and purchasers to evaluate the relative performance of differ<strong>en</strong>t provi<strong>de</strong>rs.<br />

Achterberg et al. (2001) found that the RAI has led to better case history and better<br />

care plans, which could mean the resi<strong>de</strong>nt needs are better assessed. Hav<strong>in</strong>g a better<br />

care plan does however, not necessarily mean the resi<strong>de</strong>nt is better off (for example <strong>in</strong><br />

aspects of quality of life, well-be<strong>in</strong>g and health outcomes).<br />

ACOVE (ASSESSING CARE OF VULNERABLE ELDERS) QUALITY<br />

CRITERIA<br />

The ACOVE criteria are the results of an explicit method for <strong>de</strong>velop<strong>in</strong>g process quality<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicators for vulnerable el<strong>de</strong>rs based on systematic literature reviews and several levels<br />

of expert op<strong>in</strong>ion <strong>in</strong> USA. The 236 <strong>in</strong>dicators <strong>de</strong>veloped with this method covered a<br />

range of doma<strong>in</strong>s (Scre<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g, Prev<strong>en</strong>tion, Diagnosis, Treatm<strong>en</strong>t, Follow up, Cont<strong>in</strong>uity)<br />

and conditions (cf table 2) met <strong>in</strong> the vulnerable el<strong>de</strong>rs.<br />

It is a helpful tool to assess the quality of care and prescrib<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the el<strong>de</strong>rs, and<br />

especially un<strong>de</strong>r-prescrib<strong>in</strong>g (cf the 40 items on specific medication that should be<br />

prescribed un<strong>de</strong>r m<strong>en</strong>tioned conditions).


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 157<br />

APPENDIX 8: UK COMMISSION FOR SOCIAL CARE<br />

INSPECTION OF NATIONAL MINIMUM<br />

STANDARDS ON MEDICATION CARE IN HOMES<br />

FOR OLDER PEOPLE: MEDICATION WITHIN THE<br />

HOME a<br />

Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are<br />

protected by the home s policies and procedures for <strong>de</strong>al<strong>in</strong>g with medic<strong>in</strong>es.<br />

The registered person <strong>en</strong>sures that there is a policy and staff adhere to<br />

procedures, for the receipt, record<strong>in</strong>g, storage, handl<strong>in</strong>g, adm<strong>in</strong>istration<br />

and disposal of medic<strong>in</strong>es, and service users are able to take<br />

responsibility for their own medication if they wish, with<strong>in</strong> a risk<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t framework.<br />

The service user, follow<strong>in</strong>g assessm<strong>en</strong>t as able to self-adm<strong>in</strong>ister<br />

medication, has a lockable space <strong>in</strong> which to store medication, to which<br />

suitably tra<strong>in</strong>ed, <strong>de</strong>signated care staff may have access with the service<br />

user s permission.<br />

Records are kept of all medic<strong>in</strong>es received, adm<strong>in</strong>istered and leav<strong>in</strong>g<br />

the home or disposed of to <strong>en</strong>sure that there is no mishandl<strong>in</strong>g. A<br />

record is ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed of curr<strong>en</strong>t medication for each service user<br />

(<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g those self-adm<strong>in</strong>ister<strong>in</strong>g).<br />

Medic<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong> the custody of the home are handled accord<strong>in</strong>g to the<br />

requirem<strong>en</strong>ts of the Medic<strong>in</strong>es Act 1968, gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es from the Royal<br />

Pharmaceutical Society, the requirem<strong>en</strong>ts of the Misuse of Drugs Act<br />

1971 and nurs<strong>in</strong>g staff abi<strong>de</strong> by the UKCC Standards for the<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istration of medic<strong>in</strong>es.<br />

Controlled Drugs adm<strong>in</strong>istered by staff are stored <strong>in</strong> a metal cupboard,<br />

which complies with the Misuse of Drugs (Safe Custody) Regulations<br />

1973.<br />

Medic<strong>in</strong>es, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g Controlled Drugs, for service users receiv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

nurs<strong>in</strong>g care, are adm<strong>in</strong>istered by a medical practitioner or registered<br />

nurse.<br />

In resi<strong>de</strong>ntial care homes, all medic<strong>in</strong>es, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g Controlled Drugs,<br />

(except those for self-adm<strong>in</strong>istration) are adm<strong>in</strong>istered by <strong>de</strong>signated<br />

and appropriately tra<strong>in</strong>ed staff. The adm<strong>in</strong>istration of Controlled Drugs<br />

is witnessed by another <strong>de</strong>signated, appropriately ra<strong>in</strong>ed member of<br />

staff. The tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g for care staff must be accredited and must <strong>in</strong>clu<strong>de</strong>:<br />

basic knowledge of how medic<strong>in</strong>es are used and how to recognise and<br />

<strong>de</strong>al with problems <strong>in</strong> use; the pr<strong>in</strong>ciples beh<strong>in</strong>d all aspects of the<br />

home s policy on medic<strong>in</strong>es handl<strong>in</strong>g and records.<br />

Receipt, adm<strong>in</strong>istration and disposal of Controlled Drugs are recor<strong>de</strong>d<br />

<strong>in</strong> a Controlled Drugs register.<br />

The registered manager seeks <strong>in</strong>formation and advice from a<br />

pharmacist regard<strong>in</strong>g medic<strong>in</strong>es policies with<strong>in</strong> the home and medic<strong>in</strong>es<br />

disp<strong>en</strong>sed for <strong>in</strong>dividuals <strong>in</strong> the home.<br />

Staff monitor the condition of the service user on medication and call<br />

<strong>in</strong> the GP if staff are concerned about any change <strong>in</strong> condition that may<br />

a UK Commission for Social Care Inspection; Handled with care? Manag<strong>in</strong>g medication for resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

of care homes and childr<strong>en</strong> s homes a follow up study ;<br />

February 2006, CSCI 112, special study report


158 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

be a result of medication, and prompt the review of medication on a<br />

regular basis.<br />

Wh<strong>en</strong> a service user dies, medic<strong>in</strong>es should be reta<strong>in</strong>ed for a period of<br />

sev<strong>en</strong> days <strong>in</strong> case there is a coroner s <strong>in</strong>quest.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 159<br />

APPENDIX 9: PROTOCOL FOR SCORING THE<br />

MEDICATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS<br />

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE BOARD<br />

TOPICS ANSWERING POSSIBILITIES SCORE<br />

Medication managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

Quality coord<strong>in</strong>ator Yes 0<br />

No -1<br />

Quality handbook Yes 0<br />

No -1<br />

Number of writt<strong>en</strong> agreem<strong>en</strong>ts 0-4 -1<br />

Evaluation of medication process<br />

5-9 0<br />

10 +1<br />

Never or less than once a<br />

year<br />

Annually 0<br />

-3<br />

At least every 6 months +2<br />

Self-reported medication error system Yes +1<br />

No -1<br />

Actions to prev<strong>en</strong>t errors Yes +2<br />

Formulary<br />

No -2<br />

Formulary pres<strong>en</strong>t Yes 0<br />

No -3<br />

Use of formulary advised <strong>in</strong> regulations for<br />

visit<strong>in</strong>g GPs Yes 0<br />

No -3<br />

Formulary electronically available Yes +1<br />

No 0<br />

Electronic prescrib<strong>in</strong>g system Yes +1<br />

No 0<br />

Formulary drugs as 1 st choice <strong>in</strong> electronic<br />

prescrib<strong>in</strong>g system Yes +2<br />

Pharmacy<br />

No 0<br />

Delivery of medication Per resi<strong>de</strong>nt with name 0<br />

Per resi<strong>de</strong>nt without name -2<br />

1 bag with name -1<br />

1 bag without name -3<br />

Other activities of pharmacist 0-3 0


160 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

4-5 +1<br />

> 5 +2<br />

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR SENIOR NURSE OF THE WARD<br />

TOPICS ANSWERING POSSIBILITIES SCORE<br />

Work procedures<br />

Number of writt<strong>en</strong> agreem<strong>en</strong>ts 0-4 -1<br />

Formulary<br />

5-9 0<br />

10 +1<br />

Formulary pres<strong>en</strong>t Yes 0<br />

No -2<br />

New GP <strong>in</strong>formed about formulary Systematically 0<br />

Sporadically -1<br />

Never -3<br />

GP can prescribe non-formulary drugs<br />

without motivat<strong>in</strong>g Yes 0<br />

No +2<br />

Nurse po<strong>in</strong>ts GP at prescrib<strong>in</strong>g nonformulary<br />

drugs Systematically +3<br />

Sporadically +1<br />

Never 0<br />

Formulary visibly pres<strong>en</strong>t at prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

place Yes 0<br />

No -2<br />

Formulary systematically (at<br />

prescription) pres<strong>en</strong>ted at GP<br />

every<br />

Yes, to all GPs +3<br />

Communication<br />

Yes, only to GPs receptive<br />

to it<br />

+1<br />

No 0<br />

Evaluation of medication record Systematically +3<br />

Medication record<br />

Sporadically 0<br />

Medication record Handwritt<strong>en</strong> 0<br />

Degree of <strong>in</strong>formatisation<br />

Electronic +2<br />

Only medication record is<br />

electronic<br />

Entire pati<strong>en</strong>t record is<br />

electronic<br />

Items on medication record < the legally obliged items -3<br />

0<br />

+1<br />

= the legally obliged items 0<br />

> the legally obliged items +1


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 161<br />

Frequ<strong>en</strong>cy new medication record < 1 x / month -1<br />

Per (half) month or week 0<br />

At every change +1<br />

Two person-check on correctness of<br />

medication record Yes +2<br />

No -1<br />

Or<strong>de</strong>r of chronic<br />

prescription<br />

medication after<br />

Yes 0<br />

No -2<br />

Check of disp<strong>en</strong>sed medication Yes 0<br />

Medication storage<br />

Separate room for medication storage<br />

Medication cupboard locked<br />

Separate lockable storage for stupefaction<br />

Separate refrigerator for drugs<br />

Check on the amount of stock<br />

Check on expiration dates of stock<br />

Emerg<strong>en</strong>cy kit<br />

Resi<strong>de</strong>nt autonomy <strong>in</strong> medication<br />

managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

Medication record<br />

Check on amount of stock<br />

Check on expiration date<br />

Preparation of medication<br />

Record used to prepare medication<br />

Time period for which medication is<br />

prepared<br />

No<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

Medication record<br />

Other<br />

Per week<br />

Per half week<br />

Per day<br />

-2<br />

+1<br />

0<br />

0<br />

-2<br />

0<br />

-3<br />

0<br />

-2<br />

0<br />

-1<br />

0<br />

-2<br />

0<br />

-3<br />

+1<br />

0<br />

+1<br />

0<br />

+1<br />

0<br />

0<br />

-1<br />

-3<br />

-3<br />

0


162 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Who prepares medication<br />

Docum<strong>en</strong>tation of the name of the person<br />

prepar<strong>in</strong>g the medication<br />

Check of prepared medication<br />

Preparation immediately before<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istration<br />

Check of prepared medication<br />

immediately before adm<strong>in</strong>istration<br />

Tablets out of blister<br />

Adm<strong>in</strong>istration of medication<br />

Who adm<strong>in</strong>istrates medication<br />

Docum<strong>en</strong>tation of the name of the person<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istrat<strong>in</strong>g medication<br />

Control on medication <strong>in</strong>take for m<strong>en</strong>tally<br />

fit resi<strong>de</strong>nts<br />

Information sources used to check if drug<br />

forms are crushable<br />

Information about medication<br />

Information for nurses<br />

Nurse<br />

Other<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

No<br />

Yes, by the same person<br />

Yes, by another person<br />

Yes for all m<strong>en</strong>tioned drugs<br />

(drugs requir<strong>in</strong>g cool<br />

storage, solutions,<br />

effervesc<strong>en</strong>t tablets,<br />

sachets)<br />

No for 1 or more of the<br />

m<strong>en</strong>tioned drugs<br />

No<br />

Yes, by the same person<br />

Yes, by another person<br />

No<br />

Yes, but medication<br />

prepared for max. 24 hours<br />

Yes and medication<br />

prepared for more than 24<br />

hours<br />

Nurse<br />

Other<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

None<br />

Pati<strong>en</strong>t package <strong>in</strong>serts<br />

Medical coord<strong>in</strong>ator (CRA)<br />

Pharmacist<br />

Other<br />

None<br />

Gecomm. GM-repertorium<br />

Comp<strong>en</strong>dium<br />

0<br />

-1<br />

0<br />

-1<br />

-2<br />

0<br />

+2<br />

0<br />

-2<br />

-2<br />

0<br />

+2<br />

0<br />

0<br />

- 3<br />

0<br />

-1<br />

0<br />

-1<br />

+1<br />

-1<br />

-3<br />

0<br />

0<br />

+1<br />

+1<br />

-2<br />

0<br />

0


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 163<br />

Information from pharmacist<br />

Information from doctor<br />

Pati<strong>en</strong>t education about the <strong>in</strong>dication<br />

Pati<strong>en</strong>t education about si<strong>de</strong>-effects<br />

Both<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

Yes<br />

No<br />

Systematically<br />

Only for some drugs<br />

Only on request<br />

No<br />

Systematically<br />

Only for some drugs<br />

Only on request<br />

No<br />

+1<br />

+2<br />

-1<br />

+2<br />

-1<br />

+2<br />

+1<br />

0<br />

0<br />

+2<br />

+1<br />

0<br />

0


164 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

APPENDIX 10: DETAILS OF THE PRESCRIBING<br />

QUALITY PROBLEM RESULTS<br />

Table 4.1. Beers criteria<br />

Results of the Beers Criteria (N=1720)<br />

Criterium<br />

number<br />

ATCco<strong>de</strong> Active substance<br />

Number of<br />

cases<br />

1 N02AC04 <strong>de</strong>xtropropoxyph<strong>en</strong>e 5<br />

2 M01AB01 Indometac<strong>in</strong> 0<br />

3 N02AD01 P<strong>en</strong>tazoc<strong>in</strong>e 0<br />

4 G04BD04 Oxybutyn<strong>in</strong> 78<br />

5 N05CD01 Flurazepam 10<br />

6 N06AA09 Amitriptyl<strong>in</strong>e 28<br />

7 N05BA06 Lorazepam 9<br />

8 N05BA04 Oxazepam 0<br />

9 N05BA12 Alprazolam 0<br />

10 N05BA01 Diazepam 29<br />

11 N05BA05 clorazepate potassium 20<br />

12 C01BA03 disopyrami<strong>de</strong> 4<br />

13 C01AA05 Digox<strong>in</strong> 128<br />

14 B01AC07 dipyridamole 27<br />

15 C02AB01 methyldopa (levorotatory) 3<br />

16 R06AA02 diph<strong>en</strong>hydram<strong>in</strong>e 0<br />

17 R06AA20 dim<strong>en</strong>hydr<strong>in</strong>aat 1<br />

18 R06AD02 promethaz<strong>in</strong>e 1<br />

19 C04AE01 ergoloid mesylates 34<br />

20 C04AX01 Cyclan<strong>de</strong>late 1<br />

21 B03AA07 ferrous sulfate 0<br />

22 A08AA10 Sibutram<strong>in</strong>e 1<br />

23 M01AE02 Naprox<strong>en</strong> 0<br />

24 M01AE12 Oxaproz<strong>in</strong> 1<br />

25 M01AC01 Piroxicam 15<br />

26 A06AB CONTACT LAXATIVES 0<br />

27 C01BD01 Amiodarone 70<br />

28 C04AX01 Cyclan<strong>de</strong>late 1<br />

29 J01XE NITROFURAN DERIVATIVES 0<br />

30 C02CA04 Doxazos<strong>in</strong> 0<br />

31 G03B ANDROGENS 0


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 165<br />

32 C08CA05 Nifedip<strong>in</strong>e 38<br />

33 C02AC01 Clonid<strong>in</strong>e 9<br />

34 A06AA SOFTENERS, EMOLLIENTS 0<br />

35 A02BA01 Cimetid<strong>in</strong>e 1<br />

36 N06BA10 F<strong>en</strong>etyll<strong>in</strong>e 0<br />

37 G03CA ESTROGENS 0<br />

38 N06AB03 Fluoxet<strong>in</strong>e 21<br />

Table 4.2. Bednurs Criteria<br />

Bednurse criteria (N=1730)<br />

Number of<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

Heart failure and verapamil 4<br />

Heart failure and diltiazem 39<br />

Heart failure and nonselective betablockers 59<br />

Heart failure and nonselective betablockers/thiazi<strong>de</strong>s 0<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation antihypert<strong>en</strong>sives and NSAIDS 3<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation diuretics and NSAIDS 68<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation betablocker and NSAIDs 38<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation amitryptil<strong>in</strong>e and doxep<strong>in</strong>e 28<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation antipark<strong>in</strong>son and Ph<strong>en</strong>othiaz<strong>in</strong>es 7<br />

Long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zo: diazepam 29<br />

Long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zo: clorazepate 20<br />

Long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zo: clobazam 1<br />

Long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zo: loclazepate 3<br />

Long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zo: cloxazolam 11<br />

Long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zo: clonazepam 31<br />

Long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zo: prazepam 43<br />

Long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zo: nordazepam 1<br />

Long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zo: nitrazepam 2<br />

Long act<strong>in</strong>g b<strong>en</strong>zo: flunitrazepam 14<br />

Inappropriate: alimemaz<strong>in</strong>e 8<br />

Inappropriate: promethaz<strong>in</strong>e 1<br />

Inappropriate: p<strong>en</strong>tazoc<strong>in</strong>e 0<br />

Chronic NSAID 132<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation Iron and NSAID 5<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation Iron and antithrombotics 46<br />

Heart failure and only monotherapy 191<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation ACE and Potassium or potassium sav<strong>in</strong>g diuretic 75


166 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation Psychotropics: N05+N06 594<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation Psychotropics: N05+N05 1<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ation Psychotropics: N06+N06 194<br />

Chronic use of antipsychotics (all pati<strong>en</strong>ts) 437<br />

Table 4.3. Drug drug Interactions (N=2510)<br />

GM1 ATC1 GM2 ATC2<br />

Number<br />

of<br />

pati<strong>en</strong>ts<br />

C01AA05 Digox<strong>in</strong> C03C HIGH-CEILING DIURETICS 62<br />

B01AA03 Warfar<strong>in</strong> H03 THYROID THERAPY 1<br />

C10AA HMG COA REDUCTASE INHIBIT C10AB04 Gemfibrozil 0<br />

C08DA01 Verapamil C07 BETA BLOCKING AGENTS 0<br />

B01AA03 Warfar<strong>in</strong> C01BD01 Amiodarone 7<br />

C03D POTASSIUM-SPARING AGENTS A12BA POTASSIUM 1<br />

C01AA05 Digox<strong>in</strong> C08DA01 Verapamil 1<br />

C01AA05 Digox<strong>in</strong> C01BD01 Amiodarone 9<br />

C02AC01 Clonid<strong>in</strong>e C07 BETA BLOCKING AGENTS 4<br />

J01FA MACROLIDES C10AA HMG COA REDUCTASE INHIBIT 0<br />

N02CC01 Sumatriptan N06AB SELECTIVE SEROTONIN REUPT 0<br />

L01BA01 Methotrexate M01 ANTIINFLAMMATORY AND ANTI 1<br />

L04AX03 Methotrexate M01 ANTIINFLAMMATORY AND ANTI 2<br />

C01AA05 Digox<strong>in</strong> C01BC03 Propaf<strong>en</strong>one 0<br />

C01AA05 Digox<strong>in</strong> C01BA01 Qu<strong>in</strong>id<strong>in</strong>e 0<br />

B01AA03 Warfar<strong>in</strong> A10BB SULFONAMIDES, UREA DERIVA 5<br />

B01AA03 Warfar<strong>in</strong> C01BA01 Qu<strong>in</strong>id<strong>in</strong>e 0<br />

N05AN01 Lithium M01 ANTIINFLAMMATORY AND ANTI 0<br />

B01AA03 Warfar<strong>in</strong> J02AC01 Fluconazole 0<br />

C08DA01 Verapamil N03AF01 Carbamazep<strong>in</strong>e 0<br />

B01AA03 Warfar<strong>in</strong> N03AA BARBITURATES AND DERIVATI 0<br />

B01AA03 Warfar<strong>in</strong> A02BA01 Cimetid<strong>in</strong>e 0<br />

R03DA XANTHINES J01MA FLUOROQUINOLONES 0<br />

B01AA03 Warfar<strong>in</strong> P03AB01 Clof<strong>en</strong>otane 0<br />

B01AA03 Warfar<strong>in</strong> J01XD01 Metronidazole 0<br />

B01AA03 Warfar<strong>in</strong> R03DC01 Zafirlukast 0<br />

B01AA03 Warfar<strong>in</strong> J01FA01 Erythromyc<strong>in</strong> 0<br />

N06AA NON SELECTIVE MONOAMINE R C02AC01 Clonid<strong>in</strong>e 0<br />

L01BA01 Methotrexate A10BB SULFONAMIDES, UREA DERIVA 0<br />

G04BE03 Sil<strong>de</strong>nafil C01DA ORGANIC NITRATES 0<br />

C08DA01 Verapamil C01BA01 Qu<strong>in</strong>id<strong>in</strong>e 0<br />

N04BD01 Selegil<strong>in</strong>e N06AB SELECTIVE SEROTONIN REUPT 3<br />

A08AA10 Sibutram<strong>in</strong>e N06AB SELECTIVE SEROTONIN REUPT 0<br />

N03AF01 Carbamazep<strong>in</strong>e J01FA MACROLIDES 0<br />

C01AA05 Digox<strong>in</strong> L04AA01 Ciclospor<strong>in</strong> 0<br />

R03DA XANTHINES J01FA MACROLIDES 0<br />

B01AA03 warfar<strong>in</strong> L01BC06 Capecitab<strong>in</strong>e 0<br />

R03DA XANTHINES A02BA01 Cimetid<strong>in</strong>e 0<br />

M04AA01 allopur<strong>in</strong>ol L04AX01 Azathiopr<strong>in</strong>e 0


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 167<br />

L04AA01 ciclospor<strong>in</strong> N03AB02 Ph<strong>en</strong>yto<strong>in</strong> 0<br />

L01BA01 methotrexate B01AC06 acetylsalicylic acid 0<br />

L01BA01 methotrexate N02BA01 acetylsalicylic acid 0<br />

L04AX03 methotrexate B01AC06 acetylsalicylic acid 1<br />

L04AX03 methotrexate N02BA01 acetylsalicylic acid 0<br />

J04AB02 rifampic<strong>in</strong> H02AB GLUCOCORTICOIDS 0<br />

J02AB02 ketoconazole A02BA H2-RECEPTOR ANTAGONISTS 0<br />

C01BD01 amiodarone C01BA01 Qu<strong>in</strong>id<strong>in</strong>e 0<br />

N04BD01 selegil<strong>in</strong>e N06AX16 V<strong>en</strong>lafax<strong>in</strong>e 0<br />

C10AA02 lovastat<strong>in</strong> L04AA01 Ciclospor<strong>in</strong> 0<br />

B01AA03 warfar<strong>in</strong> G03B ANDROGENS 0<br />

J04AB02 rifampic<strong>in</strong> G03A HORMONAL CONTRACEPTIVES F 0<br />

G02AB ERGOT ALKALOIDS J01FA MACROLIDES 0<br />

N06AG MONOAMINE OXIDASE TYPE A N06AB SELECTIVE SEROTONIN REUPT 0<br />

N06AG MONOAMINE OXIDASE TYPE A N06BA CENTRALLY ACTING SYMPATHO 0<br />

N06AG MONOAMINE OXIDASE TYPE A N02CC01 Sumatriptan 0<br />

N06AG MONOAMINE OXIDASE TYPE A N06AA NON SELECTIVE MONOAMINE R 0<br />

N06AF MONOAMINE OXIDASE INHIBIT N06AB SELECTIVE SEROTONIN REUPT 0<br />

N06AF MONOAMINE OXIDASE INHIBIT N06BA CENTRALLY ACTING SYMPATHO 0<br />

N06AF MONOAMINE OXIDASE INHIBIT N02CC01 Sumatriptan 0<br />

N06AF MONOAMINE OXIDASE INHIBIT N06AA NON SELECTIVE MONOAMINE R 0


168 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

APPENDIX 11: DESCRIPTION OF THE<br />

ENDOGENOUS VARIABLES INCLUDED IN THE<br />

MUTIVARIATE ANALYSIS<br />

In this app<strong>en</strong>dix, <strong>de</strong>scriptive statistics are giv<strong>en</strong> for 74 <strong>in</strong>stitutions for data on medic<strong>in</strong>es<br />

(data on medic<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong>suffici<strong>en</strong>t for 2 <strong>in</strong>stitutions) and 72 <strong>in</strong>stitutions for data on quality<br />

of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g (data on cl<strong>in</strong>ical problems miss<strong>in</strong>g for 2 extra <strong>in</strong>stitutions). Per<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitution, for a number of variables, the mean of all resi<strong>de</strong>nts was calculated.<br />

The figures and data below <strong>de</strong>scribe the variation of these means over the <strong>in</strong>stitutions.<br />

For <strong>in</strong>stance, for the total number of medication l<strong>in</strong>es on the registration chart of<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nts, the mean total number of medication l<strong>in</strong>es per resi<strong>de</strong>nt ranged from 5.8 to<br />

12.1 <strong>in</strong> the 74 <strong>in</strong>stitutions. The median of these means was 7.9.<br />

In this app<strong>en</strong>dix, we give the basic statistics of the 7 <strong>en</strong>dog<strong>en</strong>ous variables, repres<strong>en</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g<br />

volume, exp<strong>en</strong>ditures and appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

Average number drugs per resi<strong>de</strong>nt (MEDICTOT)<br />

Average number chronic systemic drugs per resi<strong>de</strong>nt (MNSYST)<br />

Average exp<strong>en</strong>ditures <strong>in</strong> ex-pharmacy retail price (publieksprijs) of<br />

reimbursed chronic drugs per month per resi<strong>de</strong>nt (MNPPCHRE)<br />

Average co-paym<strong>en</strong>t for chronic reimbursed drugs per month per<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt (MNREMCHR)<br />

Average out of pocket paym<strong>en</strong>t of non-reimbursed drugs per month<br />

per resi<strong>de</strong>nt (MNPPNONR)<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage of cheap drugs (PCGOEDKO)<br />

Average sum-score of quality problems of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g per resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

(TOTQUALM)<br />

In addition, for each of these variables the variance with<strong>in</strong> each stratum (OCMW-small;<br />

OCMM-large, Private-small; Private-large) and with<strong>in</strong> the prov<strong>in</strong>ce (Antwerp<strong>en</strong>, Oost-<br />

Vlaan<strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong>, Ha<strong>in</strong>aut) is giv<strong>en</strong>.<br />

Nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes with OCMW status are nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes run by the Local Community<br />

Social Service, while private <strong>in</strong>stitutions are either run by non-for profit charity<br />

associations or for-profit <strong>in</strong>stitutions. Nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes with more th<strong>en</strong> 90 beds were<br />

consi<strong>de</strong>red large nurs<strong>in</strong>g homes.


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 169<br />

1. Average number drugs per resi<strong>de</strong>nt (MEDICTOT) and average number<br />

of systemic drugs (MNSYST)<br />

13<br />

12<br />

11<br />

10<br />

9<br />

8<br />

7<br />

6<br />

5<br />

MEDICTOT MNSYST<br />

MEDICTOT MNSYST<br />

Mean 8.070592 7.283634<br />

Median 7.946909 7.197222<br />

Maximum 12.06667 10.63333<br />

M<strong>in</strong>imum 5.823529 5.108108<br />

Std. Dev. 1.299964 1.170890<br />

Skewness 0.658885 0.599517<br />

Kurtosis 3.302355 3.422868<br />

Jarque-Bera 5.636131 4.984211<br />

Probability 0.059721 0.082736<br />

Sum 597.2238 538.9889<br />

Sum Sq. Dev. 123.3632 100.0818<br />

Observations 74 74


170 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

9<br />

8<br />

7<br />

6<br />

5<br />

4<br />

3<br />

2<br />

1<br />

0<br />

MEDICTOT<br />

6 7 8 9 10 11 12<br />

13<br />

12<br />

11<br />

10<br />

9<br />

8<br />

7<br />

6<br />

5<br />

OCMWkl OCMWgr PRIVEkl PRIVEgr<br />

STRATUM<br />

Series: MEDICTOT<br />

Sample 1 76<br />

Observations 74<br />

Mean 8.070592<br />

Median 7.946909<br />

Maximum 12.06667<br />

M<strong>in</strong>imum 5.823529<br />

Std. Dev. 1.299964<br />

Skewness 0.658885<br />

Kurtosis 3.302355<br />

Jarque-Bera 5.636131<br />

Probability 0.059721<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d observations: 74<br />

STRATUM Mean Median Max M<strong>in</strong>. Std. Dev. Obs.<br />

OCMWkl 8.584003 8.725000 10.62857 6.825000 1.176552 15<br />

OCMWgr 7.746302 7.655172 12.06667 5.823529 1.478451 17<br />

PRIVEkl 7.895631 7.935484 10.89744 6.269231 1.112478 19<br />

PRIVEgr 8.119985 8.142857 11.22581 5.897436 1.354352 23<br />

All 8.070592 7.946909 12.06667 5.823529 1.299964 74


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 171<br />

MEDICTOT<br />

13<br />

12<br />

11<br />

10<br />

9<br />

8<br />

7<br />

6<br />

5<br />

antw Oostvl H<strong>en</strong>eg<br />

PROV<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d observations: 74<br />

PROV Mean Median Max M<strong>in</strong>. Std. Dev. Obs.<br />

antw 8.064149 8.266667 10.89744 6.250000 1.250787 27<br />

Oostvl 8.083828 7.958333 10.62857 6.424242 1.064642 25<br />

H<strong>en</strong>eg 8.063459 7.716667 12.06667 5.823529 1.625354 22<br />

All 8.070592 7.946909 12.06667 5.823529 1.299964 74


172 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

10<br />

8<br />

6<br />

4<br />

2<br />

0<br />

MNSYST<br />

5 6 7 8 9 10<br />

11<br />

10<br />

9<br />

8<br />

7<br />

6<br />

5<br />

OCMWkl OCMWgr PRIVEkl PRIVEgr<br />

STRATUM<br />

Series: MNSYST<br />

Sample 1 76<br />

Observations 76<br />

Mean 7.292319<br />

Median 7.197222<br />

Maximum 10.63333<br />

M<strong>in</strong>imum 5.108108<br />

Std. Dev. 1.196721<br />

Skewness 0.580279<br />

Kurtosis 3.232358<br />

Jarque-Bera 4.436141<br />

Probability 0.108819<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d observations: 76<br />

STRATUM Mean Median Max M<strong>in</strong>. Std. Dev. Obs.<br />

OCMWkl 7.675142 7.600000 9.486486 5.108108 1.251412 15<br />

OCMWgr 6.797712 6.846154 10.63333 5.179487 1.228337 17<br />

PRIVEkl 7.223733 7.366667 9.538462 5.447368 1.013599 19<br />

PRIVEgr 7.451082 7.352941 10.56667 5.727273 1.220923 25<br />

All 7.292319 7.197222 10.63333 5.108108 1.196721 76


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 173<br />

MNSYST<br />

11<br />

10<br />

9<br />

8<br />

7<br />

6<br />

5<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d observations: 76<br />

PROV Mean Median Max M<strong>in</strong>. Std. Dev. Obs.<br />

Antw 7.054220 6.846154 9.538462 5.108108 1.219326 27<br />

Oostvl 7.374408 7.297297 9.486486 5.939394 0.920084 25<br />

H<strong>en</strong>eg 7.474670 7.262677 10.63333 5.606061 1.413299 24<br />

All 7.292319 7.197222 10.63333 5.108108 1.196721 76<br />

2. Exp<strong>en</strong>ditures for medication<br />

antw Oostvl H<strong>en</strong>eg<br />

PROV<br />

Average exp<strong>en</strong>ditures <strong>in</strong> ex-pharmacy retail price (publieksprijs) of reimbursed chronic drugs<br />

per month per resi<strong>de</strong>nt (MNPPCHRE)<br />

Average co-paym<strong>en</strong>t for chronic reimbursed drugs per month per resi<strong>de</strong>nt (MNREMCHR)<br />

Average out of pocket paym<strong>en</strong>t of non-reimbursed drugs per month per resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

(MNPPNONR)<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage of cheap drugs (PCGOEDKO)


174 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

200<br />

160<br />

120<br />

80<br />

40<br />

0<br />

MNPPCHRE<br />

MNREMCHR<br />

MNPPNONR<br />

PCGOEDKO<br />

MNPPCHRE MNREMCHR MNPPNONR PCGOEDKO<br />

Mean 110.2141 23.38544 27.09559 28.88044<br />

Median 106.2466 22.97883 26.29417 28.60963<br />

Maximum 194.4050 36.54556 46.03676 55.88235<br />

M<strong>in</strong>imum 42.08627 14.30778 14.88654 13.23529<br />

Std. Dev. 27.70399 4.861624 7.359154 6.830823<br />

Skewness 0.495071 0.290648 0.579133 0.946244<br />

Kurtosis 3.448293 2.798354 2.704729 5.560663<br />

Jarque-Bera 3.740929 1.198796 4.524424 30.41551<br />

Probability 0.154052 0.549142 0.104120 0.000000<br />

Sum 8376.272 1777.294 2059.265 2079.392<br />

Sum Sq. Dev. 57563.31 1772.654 4061.786 3312.870<br />

Observations 76 76 76 72


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 175<br />

Average exp<strong>en</strong>ditures <strong>in</strong> ex-pharmacy retail price of reimbursed chronic<br />

drugs per month/ per resi<strong>de</strong>nt (MNPPCHRE)<br />

9<br />

8<br />

7<br />

6<br />

5<br />

4<br />

3<br />

2<br />

1<br />

0<br />

40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180<br />

MNPPCHRE<br />

200<br />

160<br />

120<br />

80<br />

40<br />

Series: MNPPCHRE<br />

Sample 1 76<br />

Observations 76<br />

OCMWkl OCMWgr PRIVEkl PRIVEgr<br />

STRATUM<br />

Mean 110.2141<br />

Median 106.2466<br />

Maximum 194.4050<br />

M<strong>in</strong>imum 42.08627<br />

Std. Dev. 27.70399<br />

Skewness 0.495071<br />

Kurtosis 3.448293<br />

Jarque-Bera 3.740929<br />

Probability 0.154052


176 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d observations: 76<br />

STRATUM Mean Median Max M<strong>in</strong>. Std. Dev. Obs.<br />

OCMWkl 117.8412 109.2755 155.8690 85.43979 24.68307 15<br />

OCMWgr 103.4918 98.59017 178.2454 64.19471 29.32677 17<br />

PRIVEkl 110.2639 114.3802 152.6149 65.95356 22.60458 19<br />

PRIVEgr 110.1712 105.7747 194.4050 42.08627 31.90774 25<br />

All 110.2141 106.2466 194.4050 42.08627 27.70399 76<br />

MNPPCHRE<br />

200<br />

160<br />

120<br />

80<br />

40<br />

antw Oostvl H<strong>en</strong>eg<br />

PROV<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d observations: 76<br />

PROV Mean Median Max M<strong>in</strong>. Std. Dev. Obs.<br />

antw 111.5153 109.4136 166.7330 71.19371 25.46530 27<br />

Oostvl 108.9190 106.7186 155.7294 64.19471 24.82187 25<br />

H<strong>en</strong>eg 110.0993 105.0544 194.4050 42.08627 33.51044 24<br />

All 110.2141 106.2466 194.4050 42.08627 27.70399 76


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 177<br />

Average co-paym<strong>en</strong>t for chronic reimbursed drugs per month per<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt (MNREMCHR)<br />

9<br />

8<br />

7<br />

6<br />

5<br />

4<br />

3<br />

2<br />

1<br />

0<br />

14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36<br />

MNREMCHR<br />

40<br />

36<br />

32<br />

28<br />

24<br />

20<br />

16<br />

12<br />

OCMWkl OCMWgr PRIVEkl PRIVEgr<br />

STRATUM<br />

Series: MNREMCHR<br />

Sample 1 76<br />

Observations 76<br />

Mean 23.38544<br />

Median 22.97883<br />

Maximum 36.54556<br />

M<strong>in</strong>imum 14.30778<br />

Std. Dev. 4.861624<br />

Skewness 0.290648<br />

Kurtosis 2.798354<br />

Jarque-Bera 1.198796<br />

Probability 0.549142


178 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d observations: 76<br />

STRATUM Mean Median Max M<strong>in</strong>. Std. Dev. Obs.<br />

OCMWkl 24.14244 23.92000 36.54556 14.30778 5.573664 15<br />

OCMWgr 21.09091 20.80724 33.57172 14.35793 4.954997 17<br />

PRIVEkl 23.86815 23.62727 32.76816 17.10400 4.340401 19<br />

PRIVEgr 24.12467 24.17033 32.95267 15.20935 4.516689 25<br />

All 23.38544 22.97883 36.54556 14.30778 4.861624 76<br />

MNREMCHR<br />

40<br />

36<br />

32<br />

28<br />

24<br />

20<br />

16<br />

12<br />

antw Oostvl H<strong>en</strong>eg<br />

PROV<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d observations: 76<br />

PROV Mean Median Max M<strong>in</strong>. Std. Dev. Obs.<br />

antw 23.01375 22.71138 32.76816 14.30778 5.021002 27<br />

Oostvl 22.27301 21.70769 36.54556 14.35793 5.201810 25<br />

H<strong>en</strong>eg 24.96238 24.84044 33.57172 16.89273 4.029355 24<br />

All 23.38544 22.97883 36.54556 14.30778 4.861624 76


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 179<br />

Paym<strong>en</strong>t of non-reimbursed drugs per month per resi<strong>de</strong>nt (MNPPNONR)<br />

8<br />

7<br />

6<br />

5<br />

4<br />

3<br />

2<br />

1<br />

0<br />

MNPPNONR<br />

15 20 25 30 35 40 45<br />

50<br />

45<br />

40<br />

35<br />

30<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

OCMWkl OCMWgr PRIVEkl PRIVEgr<br />

STRATUM<br />

Series: MNPPNONR<br />

Sample 1 76<br />

Observations 76<br />

Mean 27.09559<br />

Median 26.29417<br />

Maximum 46.03676<br />

M<strong>in</strong>imum 14.88654<br />

Std. Dev. 7.359154<br />

Skewness 0.579133<br />

Kurtosis 2.704729<br />

Jarque-Bera 4.524424<br />

Probability 0.104120


180 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d observations: 76<br />

STRATUM Mean Median Max M<strong>in</strong>. Std. Dev. Obs.<br />

OCMWkl 26.12293 24.82952 41.47162 14.88654 7.086075 15<br />

OCMWgr 29.29872 26.84605 46.03676 16.63204 8.009410 17<br />

PRIVEkl 25.35087 24.57481 43.51378 15.16221 6.459627 19<br />

PRIVEgr 27.50703 26.67746 43.90917 16.34971 7.698875 25<br />

All 27.09559 26.29417 46.03676 14.88654 7.359154 76<br />

MNPPNONR<br />

50<br />

45<br />

40<br />

35<br />

30<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

antw Oostvl H<strong>en</strong>eg<br />

PROV<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d observations: 76<br />

PROV Mean Median Max M<strong>in</strong>. Std. Dev. Obs.<br />

antw 26.48898 26.10152 41.47162 14.88654 5.869651 27<br />

Oostvl 25.05044 24.57481 41.18750 15.16221 6.510198 25<br />

H<strong>en</strong>eg 29.90837 29.61801 46.03676 16.63204 8.955073 24<br />

All 27.09559 26.29417 46.03676 14.88654 7.359154 76


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 181<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage of cheap drugs (PCGOEDKO)<br />

20<br />

16<br />

12<br />

8<br />

4<br />

0<br />

PCGOEDKO<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

20 30 40 50<br />

OCMWkl OCMWgr PRIVEkl PRIVEgr<br />

STRATUM<br />

Series: PCGOEDKO<br />

Sample 1 76<br />

Observations 72<br />

Mean 28.88044<br />

Median 28.60963<br />

Maximum 55.88235<br />

M<strong>in</strong>imum 13.23529<br />

Std. Dev. 6.830823<br />

Skewness 0.946244<br />

Kurtosis 5.560663<br />

Jarque-Bera 30.41551<br />

Probability 0.000000


182 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d observations: 72<br />

STRATUM Mean Median Max M<strong>in</strong>. Std. Dev. Obs.<br />

OCMWkl 28.79186 27.74566 55.88235 19.11765 8.344837 15<br />

OCMWgr 31.30409 32.96703 40.74074 16.85393 6.901014 17<br />

PRIVEkl 29.03448 26.66667 46.66667 19.79167 6.555714 19<br />

PRIVEgr 26.84234 27.58621 36.78161 13.23529 5.544033 21<br />

All 28.88044 28.60963 55.88235 13.23529 6.830823 72<br />

PCGOEDKO<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

antw Oostvl H<strong>en</strong>eg<br />

PROV<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d observations: 72<br />

PROV Mean Median Max M<strong>in</strong>. Std. Dev. Obs.<br />

antw 31.84964 30.79502 55.88235 19.79167 7.018133 26<br />

Oostvl 28.35437 27.74566 46.66667 17.74194 6.861920 25<br />

H<strong>en</strong>eg 25.83058 25.88235 34.66667 13.23529 5.098916 21<br />

All 28.88044 28.60963 55.88235 13.23529 6.830823 72


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 183<br />

3. Appropriat<strong>en</strong>ess of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g<br />

7<br />

6<br />

5<br />

4<br />

3<br />

2<br />

1<br />

5.0<br />

4.5<br />

4.0<br />

3.5<br />

3.0<br />

2.5<br />

2.0<br />

TOTQUALM<br />

0<br />

2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5<br />

Series: TOTQUALM<br />

Sample 1 76<br />

Observations 72<br />

Mean 3.402931<br />

Median 3.351471<br />

Maximum 4.838710<br />

M<strong>in</strong>imum 2.090909<br />

Std. Dev. 0.677271<br />

Skewness 0.227951<br />

Kurtosis 2.446152<br />

Jarque-Bera 1.543784<br />

Probability 0.462138


184 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

TOTQUALM<br />

5.0<br />

4.5<br />

4.0<br />

3.5<br />

3.0<br />

2.5<br />

2.0<br />

OCMWkl OCMWgr PRIVEkl PRIVEgr<br />

STRATUM<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d observations: 72<br />

STRATUM Mean Median Max M<strong>in</strong>. Std. Dev. Obs.<br />

OCMWkl 3.607134 3.558824 4.838710 2.206897 0.864444 15<br />

OCMWgr 3.335831 3.400000 4.333333 2.440000 0.579643 17<br />

PRIVEkl 3.310118 3.272727 4.709677 2.090909 0.726061 19<br />

PRIVEgr 3.395364 3.388889 4.823529 2.565217 0.564539 21<br />

All 3.402931 3.351471 4.838710 2.090909 0.677271 72


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 185<br />

TOTQUALM<br />

5.0<br />

4.5<br />

4.0<br />

3.5<br />

3.0<br />

2.5<br />

2.0<br />

antw Oostvl H<strong>en</strong>eg<br />

PROV<br />

Inclu<strong>de</strong>d observations: 72<br />

PROV Mean Median Max M<strong>in</strong>. Std. Dev. Obs.<br />

antw 3.157819 3.016667 4.838710 2.142857 0.731312 26<br />

Oostvl 3.672229 3.600000 4.823529 2.333333 0.594083 25<br />

H<strong>en</strong>eg 3.385810 3.481481 4.470588 2.090909 0.606024 21<br />

All 3.402931 3.351471 4.838710 2.090909 0.677271 72


186 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

APPENDIX 12: DETAILS OF THE MULTIVARIATE<br />

ANALYSIS (REGRESSION RESULTS FOR<br />

ENDOGENOUS VARIABLES)<br />

Average number drugs per resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt variable : MEDICTOT<br />

Variable Coef. St. err. t-stat Prob.<br />

(Constant) -2.353 2.896 -0.812 0.421<br />

Dovl -1.188 0.375 -3.171 0.003<br />

Dh<strong>en</strong> -0.823 0.508 -1.620 0.112<br />

Docmw -0.389 0.348 -1.116 0.270<br />

dprivefprof -1.364 0.531 -2.569 0.013<br />

Apogroot 1.442 0.617 2.340 0.024<br />

qsumPHARM -0.162 0.151 -1.074 0.288<br />

qsumMRECORD_mean -0.054 0.054 -1.011 0.317<br />

qsumADMM_mean -0.105 0.115 -0.911 0.367<br />

qsumINFO_mean 0.098 0.070 1.398 0.169<br />

percRVTbed<strong>de</strong>nvlg<strong>KCE</strong> 0.026 0.014 1.876 0.067<br />

percfemale 0.075 0.031 2.437 0.019<br />

percKatzScoreC -0.022 0.016 -1.393 0.170<br />

RbewVPK -0.344 0.079 -4.378 0.000<br />

RbewVstaf 1.184 0.286 4.133 0.000<br />

Polypath 0.790 0.342 2.308 0.025<br />

Totzorg 0.749 0.277 2.705 0.009<br />

pcOCMW -0.015 0.009 -1.786 0.080<br />

R² R²-adjusted St. err. of est. Durb<strong>in</strong>-Watson<br />

0.598 0.455 0.929994177 1.821<br />

Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F-stat Prob.<br />

Regression 61.709 17 3.63 4.197 0<br />

Residual 41.515 48 0.865<br />

Total 103.224 65


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 187<br />

Average number chronic systemic drugs per resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt variable : MNSYST<br />

Variable Coef. St. err. t-stat Prob.<br />

(Constant) -1.291 2.368 -0.545 0.588<br />

dovl -0.521 0.272 -1.914 0.061<br />

dh<strong>en</strong> -0.425 0.393 -1.082 0.284<br />

docmw -0.364 0.250 -1.455 0.152<br />

dprivefprof -0.883 0.432 -2.046 0.046<br />

apogroot 0.873 0.478 1.829 0.074<br />

qsumSTORAGE_mean -0.048 0.046 -1.036 0.305<br />

qsumADMM_mean -0.148 0.085 -1.746 0.087<br />

qsumINFO_mean 0.086 0.056 1.540 0.130<br />

percRVTbed<strong>de</strong>nvlg<strong>KCE</strong> 0.020 0.009 2.131 0.038<br />

percfemale 0.037 0.023 1.589 0.118<br />

RbewVPK -0.205 0.064 -3.227 0.002<br />

RbewVstaf 1.037 0.229 4.534 0.000<br />

pcA1new -0.024 0.022 -1.130 0.264<br />

polypath 0.921 0.261 3.524 0.001<br />

totzorg 0.463 0.218 2.126 0.039<br />

pcOCMW -0.013 0.007 -1.932 0.059<br />

R² R²-adjusted St. err. of est. Durb<strong>in</strong>-Watson<br />

0.656 0.544 0.74939 1.918<br />

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-stat Prob.<br />

Regression 52.455 16 3.278 5.838 0<br />

Residual 27.518 49 0.562<br />

Total 79.973 65


188 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Average price (publieksprijs) of reimbursed chronic drugs per month per<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt variable : MNPPCHREIMB<br />

Variable Coef. St. err. t-stat Prob.<br />

(Constant) 35.068 30.841 1.137 0.261<br />

Dh<strong>en</strong> 13.851 9.273 1.494 0.142<br />

Dprivefprof -16.284 11.855 -1.374 0.176<br />

Aantal bed<strong>de</strong>n -0.208 0.079 -2.624 0.012<br />

Aantal af<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> 5.232 2.516 2.080 0.043<br />

Proc<strong>en</strong>t bew behan<strong>de</strong>ld dr CRA 0.626 0.175 3.585 0.001<br />

Bew per ext huisarts 3.908 1.716 2.277 0.028<br />

Apomonop 5.791 6.377 0.908 0.368<br />

Proc<strong>en</strong>t bew afz factuur private kost<strong>en</strong> 0.165 0.152 1.083 0.285<br />

QsumFORM 3.474 1.854 1.873 0.067<br />

qsumSTORAGE_mean -1.320 1.268 -1.041 0.303<br />

qsumPREPMED_mean 1.011 1.116 0.905 0.370<br />

qsumADMM_mean -2.363 2.136 -1.106 0.274<br />

qsumINFO_mean 2.007 1.444 1.390 0.171<br />

RbewVPK -5.170 1.695 -3.050 0.004<br />

RbewVstaf 10.345 5.614 1.843 0.072<br />

pcA1new -1.593 0.583 -2.733 0.009<br />

Polypath 10.677 6.843 1.560 0.126<br />

Totzorg 13.966 5.708 2.447 0.018<br />

PcOCMW -0.596 0.221 -2.693 0.010<br />

R² R²-adjusted St. err. of est. Durb<strong>in</strong>-Watson<br />

0.534 0.342 18.98516 2.025<br />

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-stat Prob.<br />

Regression 19019.21 19 1001.011 2.777 0<br />

Residual 16580.073 46 360.436<br />

Total 35599.282 65


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 189<br />

Average co-paym<strong>en</strong>t for chronic reimbursed drugs per month per<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt variable : MNREMCHREIMB<br />

Variable Coef. St. err. t-stat Prob.<br />

(Constant) -14.176 8.852 -1.601 0.116<br />

Dovl -3.626 1.128 -3.215 0.002<br />

Dh<strong>en</strong> -3.256 1.358 -2.397 0.021<br />

Dprivefprof -4.103 1.530 -2.681 0.010<br />

Apoziek -4.597 2.813 -1.634 0.109<br />

Apogroot 1.713 1.827 0.938 0.353<br />

Apomonop 1.254 0.884 1.419 0.163<br />

Proc<strong>en</strong>t bew afz factuur private kost<strong>en</strong> -0.066 0.033 -1.974 0.054<br />

QsumPHARM -1.042 0.402 -2.595 0.013<br />

qsumCOM_mean 0.637 0.335 1.901 0.064<br />

qsumZELFMED_mean 1.344 0.476 2.827 0.007<br />

percRVTbed<strong>de</strong>nvlg<strong>KCE</strong> 0.199 0.034 5.844 0.000<br />

Percfemale 0.285 0.073 3.906 0.000<br />

RbewA1 -0.160 0.080 -2.002 0.051<br />

RbewVPK -0.626 0.227 -2.762 0.008<br />

RbewVstaf 5.028 0.980 5.129 0.000<br />

pcA1new -0.283 0.162 -1.748 0.087<br />

Polypath 4.675 0.797 5.867 0.000<br />

Prijsconc -1.760 0.946 -1.860 0.069<br />

PcOCMW -0.133 0.030 -4.471 0.000<br />

R² R²-adjusted St. err. of est. Durb<strong>in</strong>-Watson<br />

0.78 0.69 2.49415 1.81<br />

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-stat Prob.<br />

Regression 1016.801 19 53.516 8.603 0<br />

Residual 286.156 46 6.221<br />

Total 1302.958 65


190 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Average out of pocket paym<strong>en</strong>t of non-reimbursed drugs per month per<br />

resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt variable : MNPPNONREIMB<br />

Variable Coef. St. err. t-stat Prob.<br />

(Constant) -15.516 16.813 -0.923 0.361<br />

Dovl -7.312 2.260 -3.235 0.002<br />

Docmw -2.539 2.071 -1.226 0.226<br />

Dprivefprof -5.360 3.248 -1.650 0.106<br />

Proc<strong>en</strong>t bew behan<strong>de</strong>ld dr CRA -0.045 0.047 -0.956 0.344<br />

Bew per ext huisarts 1.243 0.492 2.527 0.015<br />

Apoziek 10.558 3.838 2.751 0.008<br />

Apogroot 6.850 3.669 1.867 0.068<br />

QsumFORM -0.671 0.474 -1.417 0.163<br />

qsumPROC_mean 3.409 1.265 2.695 0.010<br />

qsumSTORAGE_mean -0.916 0.348 -2.633 0.011<br />

qsumZELFMED_mean 1.195 1.046 1.142 0.259<br />

percRVTbed<strong>de</strong>nvlg<strong>KCE</strong> 0.122 0.070 1.755 0.086<br />

Percfemale 0.230 0.171 1.349 0.184<br />

percKatzScoreC -0.119 0.095 -1.250 0.217<br />

RbewVPK -1.117 0.478 -2.335 0.024<br />

RbewVstaf 5.143 1.470 3.498 0.001<br />

Totzorg 5.872 1.571 3.738 0.001<br />

PcOCMW -0.125 0.063 -2.000 0.051<br />

R² R²-adjusted St. err. of est. Durb<strong>in</strong>-Watson<br />

0.592 0.436 5.58947 2.191<br />

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-stat Prob.<br />

Regression 2132.037 18 118.447 3.791 0<br />

Residual 1468.384 47 31.242<br />

Total 3600.421 65


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 191<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage of cheap drugs<br />

Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt variable : PCGOEDKOOP<br />

Variable Coef. St. err. t-stat Prob.<br />

(Constant) 57.162 14.654 3.901 0.000<br />

dovl 5.497 2.307 2.383 0.021<br />

dh<strong>en</strong> 5.395 2.614 2.064 0.045<br />

docmw -3.916 1.683 -2.326 0.024<br />

apomonop -5.319 1.519 -3.502 0.001<br />

Proc<strong>en</strong>t bew afz factuur private kost<strong>en</strong> -0.080 0.032 -2.467 0.017<br />

qsumMANAG -0.187 0.185 -1.011 0.317<br />

qsumFORM 0.392 0.452 0.868 0.390<br />

qsumFORM_mean 0.418 0.243 1.722 0.092<br />

qsumCOM_mean 0.872 0.625 1.395 0.170<br />

qsumADMM_mean -0.589 0.527 -1.118 0.269<br />

qsumINFO_mean 0.632 0.369 1.715 0.093<br />

percRVTbed<strong>de</strong>nvlg<strong>KCE</strong> -0.089 0.069 -1.301 0.200<br />

percfemale -0.207 0.140 -1.481 0.145<br />

RbewA1 0.151 0.080 1.890 0.065<br />

RbewVPK 0.413 0.398 1.038 0.305<br />

RbewVstaf -4.664 1.418 -3.289 0.002<br />

pc<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>t 0.086 0.062 1.378 0.175<br />

totzorg -2.194 1.244 -1.764 0.084<br />

prijsconc 8.334 2.061 4.043 0.000<br />

R² R²-adjusted St. err. of est. Durb<strong>in</strong>-Watson<br />

0.612 0.452 4.4758 2.536<br />

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-stat Prob.<br />

Regression 1452.578 19 76.451 3.816 0<br />

Residual 921.506 46 20.033<br />

Total 2374.084 65


192 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Average sum-score of quality problems of prescrib<strong>in</strong>g per resi<strong>de</strong>nt<br />

Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt variable : TOTQUALMN<br />

Variable Coef. St. err. t-stat Prob.<br />

(Constant) 12.400 3.279 3.782 0.000<br />

Aantal bed<strong>de</strong>n 0.003 0.001 2.294 0.026<br />

Proc<strong>en</strong>t bew behan<strong>de</strong>ld dr CRA -0.008 0.004 -2.015 0.049<br />

Bew per ext huisarts -0.073 0.041 -1.772 0.083<br />

Apoziek 0.397 0.277 1.432 0.158<br />

Apogroot 0.267 0.291 0.919 0.362<br />

qsumPHARM -0.187 0.073 -2.569 0.013<br />

qsumPREPMED_mean -0.043 0.024 -1.786 0.080<br />

percRVTbed<strong>de</strong>nvlg<strong>KCE</strong> -0.009 0.006 -1.556 0.126<br />

Age -0.107 0.034 -3.113 0.003<br />

RbewA1 -0.009 0.006 -1.578 0.121<br />

RbewVPK -0.069 0.034 -2.040 0.047<br />

pc<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>t -0.012 0.005 -2.190 0.033<br />

polypath 0.550 0.161 3.421 0.001<br />

totzorg 0.218 0.135 1.617 0.112<br />

pcOCMW -0.007 0.005 -1.330 0.189<br />

R² R²-adjusted St. err. of est. Durb<strong>in</strong>-Watson<br />

0.638 0.529 0.44794 1.722<br />

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-stat Prob.<br />

Regression 17.674 15 1.178 5.872 0<br />

Residual 10.032 50 0.201<br />

Total 27.706 65


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 193<br />

Medication managem<strong>en</strong>t<br />

Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt variable : QSUMMANAG<br />

Variable Coef. St. err. t-stat Prob.<br />

(Constant) 34.287 24.730 1.386 0.171<br />

Dh<strong>en</strong> 1.694 1.452 1.167 0.248<br />

Apoziek -3.318 1.934 -1.715 0.092<br />

Apomonop 1.404 1.176 1.194 0.238<br />

Age -0.298 0.271 -1.100 0.276<br />

RbewA1 -0.177 0.084 -2.103 0.040<br />

pcA1new -0.235 0.179 -1.316 0.194<br />

Pc<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>t -0.038 0.035 -1.110 0.272<br />

Polypath 1.640 1.238 1.324 0.191<br />

Totzorg -1.079 1.071 -1.007 0.318<br />

Prijsconc -1.717 1.203 -1.427 0.159<br />

PcOCMW 0.034 0.035 0.982 0.331<br />

R² R²-adjusted St. err. of est. Durb<strong>in</strong>-Watson<br />

0.19 0.025 3.55633 2.06<br />

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-stat Prob.<br />

Regression 160.021 11 14.547 1.15 0.34<br />

Residual 682.963 54 12.647<br />

Total 842.985 65


194 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Formulary<br />

Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt variable : QSUMFORM<br />

Variable Coef. St. err. t-stat Prob.<br />

(Constant) -7.856 10.898 -0.721 0.474<br />

Dovl 0.585 0.540 1.083 0.284<br />

Dh<strong>en</strong> -1.777 0.635 -2.799 0.007<br />

Dprivefprof 1.939 0.835 2.323 0.024<br />

Proc<strong>en</strong>t bew afz factuur private kost<strong>en</strong> -0.027 0.009 -2.996 0.004<br />

Age 0.148 0.120 1.229 0.224<br />

Percfemale -0.045 0.041 -1.082 0.284<br />

RbewA1 -0.040 0.033 -1.187 0.240<br />

RbewVPK 0.249 0.098 2.556 0.013<br />

pcA1new -0.110 0.070 -1.567 0.123<br />

Pc<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>t 0.017 0.016 1.094 0.279<br />

PcOCMW 0.024 0.015 1.593 0.117<br />

R² R²-adjusted St. err. of est. Durb<strong>in</strong>-Watson<br />

0.635 0.561 1.41392 2.155<br />

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-stat Prob.<br />

Regression 188.166 11 17.106 8.557 0<br />

Residual 107.956 54 1.999<br />

Total 296.121 65


<strong>KCE</strong> reports 47 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes 195<br />

Pharmacist<br />

Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt variable : QSUMPHARM<br />

Variable Coef. St. err. t-stat Prob.<br />

(Constant) 1.409 1.124 1.253 0.216<br />

Aantal bed<strong>de</strong>n 0.006 0.002 2.639 0.011<br />

Proc<strong>en</strong>t bew behan<strong>de</strong>ld dr CRA -0.012 0.006 -1.801 0.077<br />

Bew per ext huisarts -0.099 0.067 -1.469 0.148<br />

Apoziek 1.119 0.442 2.534 0.014<br />

Apogroot 0.723 0.506 1.428 0.159<br />

Apomonop 0.396 0.268 1.477 0.146<br />

percKatzScoreC 0.021 0.011 1.938 0.058<br />

RbewVPK -0.177 0.063 -2.813 0.007<br />

RbewVstaf 0.316 0.200 1.575 0.121<br />

Pc<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>t -0.024 0.009 -2.587 0.013<br />

Polypath -0.734 0.272 -2.695 0.009<br />

Totzorg 0.319 0.221 1.446 0.154<br />

Prijsconc -0.620 0.239 -2.597 0.012<br />

R² R²-adjusted St. err. of est. Durb<strong>in</strong>-Watson<br />

0.489 0.361 0.7873 1.912<br />

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-stat Prob.<br />

Regression 30.799 13 2.369 3.822 0<br />

Residual 32.232 52 0.62<br />

Total 63.03 65


196 Medication use <strong>in</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Homes <strong>KCE</strong> reports 47<br />

Sum of quality scores of medication managem<strong>en</strong>t on board level<br />

Dep<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong>nt variable : QSUMTOTDIR<br />

Variable Coef. St. err. t-stat Prob.<br />

(Constant) 8.400 5.122 1.640 0.107<br />

dprivefprof 2.808 2.260 1.243 0.219<br />

apomonop 1.432 1.295 1.106 0.274<br />

percKatzScoreC 0.061 0.048 1.275 0.207<br />

RbewA1 -0.164 0.080 -2.049 0.045<br />

pcA1new -0.268 0.182 -1.472 0.147<br />

pc<strong>de</strong>m<strong>en</strong>t -0.080 0.044 -1.824 0.073<br />

prijsconc -2.038 1.426 -1.429 0.158<br />

pcOCMW 0.063 0.031 1.997 0.051<br />

R² R²-adjusted St. err. of est. Durb<strong>in</strong>-Watson<br />

0.208 0.097 4.07701 1.754<br />

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-stat Prob.<br />

Regression 249.528 8 31.191 1.876 0.082<br />

Residual 947.457 57 16.622<br />

Total 1196.985 65


This page is left <strong>in</strong>t<strong>en</strong>tionally blank.


Wettelijk <strong>de</strong>pot : D/2006/10.273/61


<strong>KCE</strong> reports<br />

1. Effectiviteit <strong>en</strong> kost<strong>en</strong>-effectiviteit van behan<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> voor rookstop. D/2004/10.273/1.<br />

2. Studie naar <strong>de</strong> mogelijke kost<strong>en</strong> van e<strong>en</strong> ev<strong>en</strong>tuele wijzig<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> rechtsregels <strong>in</strong>zake medische aansprakelijkheid (fase<br />

1). D/2004/10.273/2.<br />

3. Antibioticagebruik <strong>in</strong> ziek<strong>en</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong> bij acute pyelonefritis. D/2004/10.273/5.<br />

4. Leukoreductie. E<strong>en</strong> mogelijke maatregel <strong>in</strong> het ka<strong>de</strong>r van e<strong>en</strong> nationaal beleid voor bloedtransfusieveiligheid.<br />

D/2004/10.273/7.<br />

5. Het preoperatief on<strong>de</strong>rzoek. D/2004/10.273/9.<br />

6. Validatie van het rapport van <strong>de</strong> On<strong>de</strong>rzoekscommissie over <strong>de</strong> on<strong>de</strong>rf<strong>in</strong>ancier<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> ziek<strong>en</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong>. D/2004/10.273/11.<br />

7. Nationale richtlijn pr<strong>en</strong>atale zorg. E<strong>en</strong> basis voor e<strong>en</strong> kl<strong>in</strong>isch pad voor <strong>de</strong> opvolg<strong>in</strong>g van zwangerschapp<strong>en</strong>.<br />

D/2004/10.273/13.<br />

8. F<strong>in</strong>ancier<strong>in</strong>gssystem<strong>en</strong> van ziek<strong>en</strong>huisg<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>: e<strong>en</strong> beschrijv<strong>en</strong><strong>de</strong> studie van e<strong>en</strong> aantal Europese lan<strong>de</strong>n <strong>en</strong><br />

Canada. D/2004/10.273/15.<br />

9. Feedback: on<strong>de</strong>rzoek naar <strong>de</strong> impact <strong>en</strong> barrières bij implem<strong>en</strong>tatie On<strong>de</strong>rzoeksrapport: <strong>de</strong>el 1. D/2005/10.273/01.<br />

10. De kost van tandprothes<strong>en</strong>. D/2005/10.273/03.<br />

11. Borstkankerscre<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g. D/2005/10.273/05.<br />

12. Studie naar e<strong>en</strong> alternatieve f<strong>in</strong>ancier<strong>in</strong>g van bloed <strong>en</strong> labiele bloed<strong>de</strong>rivat<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> ziek<strong>en</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong>. D/2005/10.273/07.<br />

13. Endovasculaire behan<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g van Carotisst<strong>en</strong>ose. D/2005/10.273/09.<br />

14. Variaties <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> ziek<strong>en</strong>huispraktijk bij acuut myocard<strong>in</strong>farct <strong>in</strong> België. D/2005/10.273/11.<br />

15. Evolutie van <strong>de</strong> uitgav<strong>en</strong> voor gezondheidszorg. D/2005/10.273/13.<br />

16. Studie naar <strong>de</strong> mogelijke kost<strong>en</strong> van e<strong>en</strong> ev<strong>en</strong>tuele wijzig<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> rechtsregels <strong>in</strong>zake medische aansprakelijkheid. Fase<br />

II : ontwikkel<strong>in</strong>g van e<strong>en</strong> actuarieel mo<strong>de</strong>l <strong>en</strong> eerste schatt<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong>. D/2005/10.273/15.<br />

17. Evaluatie van <strong>de</strong> refer<strong>en</strong>tiebedrag<strong>en</strong>. D/2005/10.273/17.<br />

18. Prospectief bepal<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> honoraria van ziek<strong>en</strong>huisarts<strong>en</strong> op basis van kl<strong>in</strong>ische pa<strong>de</strong>n <strong>en</strong> gui<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>es: makkelijker gezegd<br />

dan gedaan.. D/2005/10.273/19.<br />

19. Evaluatie van forfaitaire persoonlijk bijdrage op het gebruik van spoedgevall<strong>en</strong>di<strong>en</strong>st. D/2005/10.273/21.<br />

20. HTA Moleculaire Diagnostiek <strong>in</strong> België. D/2005/10.273/23, D/2005/10.273/25.<br />

21. HTA Stomamateriaal <strong>in</strong> België. D/2005/10.273/27.<br />

22. HTA Positron<strong>en</strong> Emissie Tomografie <strong>in</strong> België. D/2005/10.273/29.<br />

23. HTA De electieve <strong>en</strong>dovasculaire behan<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g van het abdom<strong>in</strong>ale aorta aneurysma (AAA). D/2005/10.273/32.<br />

24. Het gebruik van natriuretische pepti<strong>de</strong>s <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> diagnostische aanpak van patiënt<strong>en</strong> met vermoe<strong>de</strong>n van hartfal<strong>en</strong>.<br />

D/2005/10.273/34.<br />

25. Capsule <strong>en</strong>doscopie. D/2006/10.273/01.<br />

26. Medico legale aspect<strong>en</strong> van kl<strong>in</strong>ische praktijkrichtlijn<strong>en</strong>. D2006/10.273/05.<br />

27. De kwaliteit <strong>en</strong> <strong>de</strong> organisatie van type 2 diabeteszorg. D2006/10.273/07.<br />

28. Voorlopige richtlijn<strong>en</strong> voor farmaco-economisch on<strong>de</strong>rzoek <strong>in</strong> België. D2006/10.273/10.<br />

29. Nationale Richtlijn<strong>en</strong> College voor Oncologie: A. algeme<strong>en</strong> ka<strong>de</strong>r oncologisch kwaliteitshandboek B. wet<strong>en</strong>schappelijke<br />

basis voor kl<strong>in</strong>ische pa<strong>de</strong>n voor diagnose <strong>en</strong> behan<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g colorectale kanker <strong>en</strong> testiskanker. D2006/10.273/12.<br />

30. Inv<strong>en</strong>taris van databank<strong>en</strong> gezondheidszorg. D2006/10.273/14.<br />

31. Health Technology Assessm<strong>en</strong>t prostate-specific-antig<strong>en</strong> (PSA) voor prostaatkankerscre<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g. D2006/10.273/17.<br />

32. Feedback : on<strong>de</strong>rzoek naar <strong>de</strong> impact <strong>en</strong> barrières bij implem<strong>en</strong>tatie On<strong>de</strong>rzoeksrapport : <strong>de</strong>el II. D/2006/10.273/19.<br />

33. Effect<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> kost<strong>en</strong> van <strong>de</strong> vacc<strong>in</strong>atie van Belgische k<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> met geconjugeerd pneumokokk<strong>en</strong>vacc<strong>in</strong>. D/2006/10.273/21.<br />

34. Trastuzumab bij vroegtijdige stadia van borstkanker. D/2006/10.273/23.<br />

35. Studie naar <strong>de</strong> mogelijke kost<strong>en</strong> van e<strong>en</strong> ev<strong>en</strong>tuele wijzig<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> rechtsregels <strong>in</strong>zake medische aansprakelijkheid (fase<br />

III)- preciser<strong>in</strong>g van <strong>de</strong> kost<strong>en</strong>ram<strong>in</strong>g. D/2006/10.273/26.<br />

36. Farmacologische <strong>en</strong> chirurgische behan<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g van obesitas. Resi<strong>de</strong>ntiële zorg voor ernstig obese k<strong>in</strong><strong>de</strong>r<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> België.<br />

D/2006/10.273/28.<br />

37. HTA Magnetische Resonantie Beeldvorm<strong>in</strong>g. D/2006/10.273/32.<br />

38. Baarmoe<strong>de</strong>rhalskankerscre<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>en</strong> test<strong>en</strong> op Human Papillomavirus (HPV). D/2006/10.273/35<br />

39. Rapid assessm<strong>en</strong>t van nieuwe wervelzuil technologieën : totale discusprothese <strong>en</strong> vertebro/ballon kyfoplastie.<br />

D/2006/10.273/38.<br />

40. Functioneel bilan van <strong>de</strong> patiënt als mogelijke basis voor nom<strong>en</strong>clatuur van k<strong>in</strong>esitherapie <strong>in</strong> België? D/2006/10.273/40.<br />

41. Kl<strong>in</strong>ische kwaliteits<strong>in</strong>dicator<strong>en</strong>. D/2006/10.273/43.<br />

42. Studie naar praktijkverschill<strong>en</strong> bij electieve chirurgische <strong>in</strong>grep<strong>en</strong> <strong>in</strong> België. D/2006/10.273/45.<br />

43. Herzi<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g bestaan<strong>de</strong> praktijkrichtlijn<strong>en</strong>. D/2006/10.273/48.<br />

44. E<strong>en</strong> procedure voor <strong>de</strong> beoor<strong>de</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g van nieuwe medische hulpmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>. D/2006/10.273/50.<br />

45. HTA Colorectale Kankerscre<strong>en</strong><strong>in</strong>g: wet<strong>en</strong>schappelijke stand van zak<strong>en</strong> <strong>en</strong> budgetimpact voor België. D/2006/10.273/53.<br />

46. Health Technology Assessm<strong>en</strong>t. Polysomnografie <strong>en</strong> thuismonitor<strong>in</strong>g van zuigel<strong>in</strong>g<strong>en</strong> voor <strong>de</strong> prev<strong>en</strong>tie van wieg<strong>en</strong>dood.<br />

D/2006/10.273/59.<br />

47. <strong>G<strong>en</strong>eesmid<strong>de</strong>l<strong>en</strong>gebruik</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>belgische</strong> <strong><strong>rust</strong>huiz<strong>en</strong></strong> <strong>en</strong> <strong>rust</strong>- <strong>en</strong> verzorg<strong>in</strong>gstehuiz<strong>en</strong>. D/2006/10.273/61

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!