JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Does incorporating medications in the surveyors' interpretive guidelines reduce the use of potentially inappropriate medications in nursing homes?

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the association between including specific medications deemed potentially inappropriate in the surveyors' interpretive guidelines for nursing homes and the prevalence of use.

DESIGN: Quasi-experimental.

SETTING: One thousand one hundred forty-one nursing homes in four U.S. states.

PARTICIPANTS: Residents living in one of the included nursing homes in operation during 1997 (before Beers; n=130,250) and 2000 (after Beers; n=164,889).

INTERVENTION: Inclusion of specific medications deemed potentially inappropriate in the surveyors' interpretive guidelines for nursing homes.

MEASUREMENTS: Logistic regression models adjusting for clustering effects of residents residing in homes provided estimates of the relationship between the survey process and use of any medications targeted as potentially inappropriate as part of the survey process, as well as those deemed inappropriate but not included.

RESULTS: The use of any potentially inappropriate medication decreased from 42.5% in 1997 to 39.8% in 2000. After adjustment for resident characteristics, residents were less likely to receive any potentially inappropriate medication (odds ratio (OR)=0.85, 95% confidence interval (95% CI)=0.84-0.87), those considered high-severity drugs (those with a high likelihood of a clinically significant adverse event) (OR=0.67, 95% CI=0.65-0.69), or Beers' medications not included in the surveyors' guidelines (OR=0.76, 95% CI=0.74-0.79) in 2000 than in 1997 after the changes to the drug regulations and interpretive guidelines.

CONCLUSION: Targeting specific drugs in the surveyor's interpretive guidelines as a method to reduce potentially inappropriate medication use may not produce desired gains in medication-use quality improvement. Alternative strategies for nursing homes should be evaluated.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app