Background: Medication-related harm (MRH) is an escalating global challenge especially among older adults. The period following hospital discharge carries high-risk for MRH due to medication discrepancies, limited patient/carer education and support, and poor communication between hospital and community professionals. Discharge Medical Service (DMS), a newly introduced NHS scheme, aims to reduce post-discharge MRH through an electronic communication between hospital and community pharmacists. Our study team has previously developed a risk-prediction tool (RPT) for MRH in the 8-weeks period post discharge from a UK hospital cohort of 1280 patients. In this study, we aim to find out if a Medicines Management Plan (MMP) linked to the DMS is more effective than the DMS alone in reducing rates of MRH. Method: Using a randomized control trial design, 682 older adults ≥ 65 years due to be discharged from hospital will be recruited from 4 sites. Participants will be randomized to an intervention arm (individualised medicine management plan (MMP) plus DMS) or a control arm (DMS only) using a 1:1 ratio stratification. Baseline data will include patients’ clinical and social demographics, and admission and discharge medications. At 8-weeks post-discharge, a telephone interview and review of GP records by the study pharmacist will verify MRH in both arms. An economic and process evaluation will assess the cost and acceptability of the study methods. Data analysis: Univariate analysis will be done for baseline variables comparing the intervention and control arms. A multivariate logistic regression will be done incorporating these variables. Economic evaluation will compare the cost-of-service use among the study arms and modelled to provide national estimates. Qualitative data from focus-group interviews will explore practitioners’ understanding, and acceptance of the MMP, DMS and the RPT. Conclusion: This study will inform the use of an objective, validated RPT for MRH among older adults after hospital discharge, and provide a clinical, economic, and service evaluation of a specific medicines management plan alongside the DMS in the National Health Service (UK).

The article Current evidence on the impact of medication optimization or pharmacological interventions on frailty or aspects of frailty: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials, written by Farhad Pazan, Mirko Petrovic, Antonio Cherubini, Graziano Onder, Alfonso J. Cruz-Jentoft, Michael Denkinger, Tischa J. M. van der Cammen, Jennifer M. Stevenson, Kinda Ibrahim, Chakravarthi Rajkumar, Marit Stordal Bakken, Jean-Pierre Baeyens, Peter Crome, Thomas Frühwald, Paul Gallaghar, Adalsteinn Guðmundsson, Wilma Knol, Denis O’Mahony, Alberto Pilotto, Elina Rönnemaa, José Antonio Serra-Rexach, George Soulis, Rob J. van Marum, Gijsbertus Ziere, Alpana Mair, Heinrich Burkhardt, Agnieszka Neumann-Podczaska, Katarzyna Wieczorowska- Tobis, Marilia Andreia Fernandes, Heidi Gruner, Dhayana Dallmeier, Jean-Baptiste Beuscart, Nathalie van der Velde and Martin Wehling, was originally published electronically on the publisher’s internet portal on 07 August 2020 without open access. With the author(s)’ decision to opt for Open Choice the copyright of the article changed on 14 May 2021 to

Background: Frailty and adverse drug effects are linked in the fact that polypharmacy is correlated with the severity of frailty; however, a causal relation has not been proven in older people with clinically manifest frailty. Methods: A literature search was performed in Medline to detect prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing the effects of pharmacological interventions or medication optimization in older frail adults on comprehensive frailty scores or partial aspects of frailty that were published from January 1998 to October 2019. Results: Twenty-five studies were identified, 4 on comprehensive frailty scores and 21 on aspects of frailty. Two trials on comprehensive frailty scores showed positive results on frailty although the contribution of medication review in a multidimensional approach was unclear. In the studies on aspects related to frailty, ten individual drug interventions showed improvement in physical performance, muscle strength or body composition utilizing alfacalcidol, teriparatide, piroxicam, testosterone, recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin, or capromorelin. There were no studies examining negative effects of drugs on frailty. Conclusion: So far, data on a causal relationship between drugs and frailty are inconclusive or related to single-drug interventions on partial aspects of frailty. There is a clear need for RCTs on this topic that should be based on a comprehensive, internationally consistent and thus reproducible concept of frailty assessment.

Objectives To develop and validate a tool to predict the risk of an older adult experiencing medication-related harm (MRH) requiring healthcare use following hospital discharge. Design, setting, participants Multicentre, prospective cohort study recruiting older adults (≥65 years) discharged from five UK teaching hospitals between 2013 and 2015. Primary outcome measure Participants were followed up for 8 weeks in the community by senior pharmacists to identify MRH (adverse drug reactions, harm from non-adherence, harm from medication error). Three data sources provided MRH and healthcare use information: Hospital readmissions, primary care use, participant telephone interview. Candidate variables for prognostic modelling were selected using two systematic reviews, the views of patients with MRH and an expert panel of clinicians. Multivariable logistic regression with backward elimination, based on the Akaike Information Criterion, was used to develop the PRIME tool. The tool was internally validated. Results 1116 out of 1280 recruited participants completed follow-up (87%). Uncertain MRH cases (â 'possible' and 'aprobable') were excluded, leaving a tool derivation cohort of 818. 119 (15%) participants experienced 'definite' MRH requiring healthcare use and 699 participants did not. Modelling resulted in a prediction tool with eight variables measured at hospital discharge: Age, gender, antiplatelet drug, sodium level, antidiabetic drug, past adverse drug reaction, number of medicines, living alone. The tool's discrimination C-statistic was 0.69 (0.66 after validation) and showed good calibration. Decision curve analysis demonstrated the potential value of the tool to guide clinical decision making compared with alternative approaches. Conclusions The PRIME tool could be used to identify older patients at high risk of MRH requiring healthcare use following hospital discharge. Prior to clinical use we recommend the tool's evaluation in other settings.