Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31342248›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2019

Pro re nata prescribing and administration for neuropsychiatric symptoms and pain in long-term care residents with dementia and memory problems: a cross-sectional study.

Alys W Griffiths, Claire A Surr, David P Alldred, John Baker, Ruchi Higham, Karen Spilsbury, Carl A Thompson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. PRN Medicines Optimization and Nurse Education.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Alys W GriffithsCentre for Dementia Research, School of Health and Community Studies, Leeds Beckett University, City Campus, Leeds, LS1 3HE, UK. alys.griffiths@leedsbeckett.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9388-9168
Claire A SurrCentre for Dementia Research, School of Health and Community Studies, Leeds Beckett University, City Campus, Leeds, LS1 3HE, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4312-6661
David P AlldredSchool of Healthcare, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2525-4854
John BakerSchool of Healthcare, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9985-9875
Ruchi HighamSchool of Healthcare, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0529-1041
Karen SpilsburySchool of Healthcare, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6908-0032
Carl A ThompsonSchool of Healthcare, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9369-1204

Funding

Department of Health 11/15/13Department of Health HS&DR/15/144/29Health Technology Assessment Programme 11/15/13
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Prescribing, dispensing and administering pro re nata (PRN; as needed or necessary, as determined by an individual) medicines to people with intermittent or short-term conditions is a potential area for medication errors and inappropriate prescribing and administration. In people with dementia, regular PRN medicines use can demonstrate good practice when appropriate or poor in situations where their use is not recommended. However, the frequency of PRN prescription and administration within long-term care settings (care homes) for people with dementia is largely unknown. A limited number of studies worldwide suggest variation between countries. Objective To describe the prescription and administration rates of PRN medicines for people with dementia in UK care homes. Setting Fifty UK care homes. Method Medication details were collected from review of residents' medicines records within the care home for the previous month. Main outcome measure Prescription and administration of PRN medicines for the treatment of behaviours associated with neuropsychiatric symptoms and pain. Results The most commonly prescribed PRN medicines were analgesics (35.3%), although lower levels of PRN prescription were observed compared to recent studies. The percentage of residents receiving PRN administrations varied, with 20% for antipsychotics, 50% for benzodiazepines, 59% for analgesics, and 85.7% for nonbenzodiazepine hypnotics being administered. Conclusion Further research is needed to understand the decision making in PRN prescription and administration within long-term care. The prescribing of potentially inappropriate medicines remains a problem in long-term care settings and pharmacists have a key role in reducing inappropriate polypharmacy by undertaking medication reviews that consider both regular and PRN medicines.

Indexed as

Drug PrescriptionsAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesDementiaDrug UtilizationFemaleHumansInappropriate PrescribingInpatientsLong-Term CareMaleMemory DisordersMental DisordersPainSocioeconomic FactorsAnalgesicAntipsychoticsDementiaLong-term careNeuropsychiatric symptomsPainPro re nataUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID31342248
PMCPMC6800850

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.