Evaluation of a collaborative pharmacy service initiative for people with intellectual disabilities in residential care homes

Abstract

Abstract Introduction People with Intellectual Disabilities (ID) often have complex care needs and increased likelihood of premature death.1 The NHS has committed to improving the use of psychotropic medicines in people with ID with the Stopping the Over-Medication of People with Learning Disabilities (STOMP) programme.2 In the Wirral a cross-sector, collaborative service initiative involving community pharmacists and a specialist mental health pharmacist was developed to provide pharmaceutical care reviews for ID care home residents, which included an evaluation of the initiative. Aim This study aimed to determine the number and type of pharmacists’ interventions and GP recommendations in this service initiative. Methods Pharmacists provided pharmaceutical care reviews for ID care home residents using a framework and where applicable made interventions or recommendations to residents’ GPs or consultant psychiatrist. The framework was devised by the lead Consultant, Mental Health Trust lead pharmacist and Local Pharmaceutical Committee representatives to align with national ID priorities.1 Pharmacists were recruited via expressions of interest and direct recruitment by the mental health trust. Using anonymised, aggregated, Clinical Commissioning Group data, an Oversight Group divided all ID care homes in the locality into two groups: homes with residents with low psychotropic medicines use were primarily assigned to community pharmacists, whilst those with higher psychotropic use were assigned to the specialist mental health pharmacist. Pharmacists contacted care home managers and arranged reviews with all residents, sharing learnings in weekly reviews. Community pharmacists identified residents who would benefit from specialist mental health pharmacist review and referred them. Data collected included patient demographic details, medication history, results of assessments completed and interventions/recommendations. Following institutional ethical approval, this data was downloaded from PharmOutcomes into Microsoft Excel and personally identifiable data removed. The data underwent descriptive statistical analysis in SPSS, including frequency counting interventions by type. Results The pharmacists conducted reviews with 160 residents (76 by community pharmacists and 84 by the specialist mental health pharmacist) from November 2019 – May 2020, reflecting all residents in visited care homes. These residents were prescribed 1207 medicines, 74% were prescribed 5 or more medicines (i.e. polypharmacy) and 507 interventions or recommendations were made, averaging 3.3 per resident. Table 1 shows that the highest proportion (30.4%) of these were public health related, whilst changing and stopping medicines accounted for 17.9% and 12.8% respectively. The majority (63%) of interventions made by community pharmacists were public health related, whilst those made by the mental health specialist pharmacist most frequently concerned changing medicines (25%), stopping medicines (18%), and blood monitoring (13%). Conclusion The study findings indicate a high level of polypharmacy among the ID residents and a high number of interventions / recommendations were needed to improve care, in line with national priorities.1,2 The small scale of the study is acknowledged, and further research is warranted. However, the findings suggest that this service model may be an effective use of the respective skill sets of the pharmacists involved and suitable for wider adoption, with community pharmacists focusing on holistic care and specialist mental health making specialist medicines interventions.