Background/Objectives: This pilot study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of applying the Beers criteria in the community pharmacy setting and aid pharmacists in identifying and emphasizing adverse effects from potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) for older adults. Methods: We applied a single-center retrospective study to collect demographic and outcome data in order to analyze dispensed PIMs for older adults. We used an evaluation tool to compare warnings between pharmacy dispensing software and the Beers criteria. Descriptive statistics were computed via standard statistical software. Results: Culled from a random selection of 215 patients, the medical records from 50 subjects ≥65 years old were reviewed, including 440 of their medications. Our data demonstrated that 96% of subjects were dispensed at least one PIM, with a total of 34 different PIMs distributed at varying frequencies. A comparative analysis indicated that 74% of dispensed medications had similar, but not identical, warning profiles presented in the dispensing software and Beers criteria. Anticholinergic burden of dispensed PIMs indicated that older adults were at risk of falls and delirium. By supplementing the dispensing software with Beers criteria, we were able to create clinical communication notes for providers, patients, and pharmacy students to emphasize the role pharmacists can play to minimize PIM’s adverse effects on older adults. Conclusions: Our data indicates the feasibility of implementing the Beers criteria in the community pharmacy setting. Integrating the dispensing software warnings with Beers criteria created a structured intervention strategy to prevent potential adverse effects and develop clinical communication notes to emphasize a more engaging role that the community pharmacy setting can play to optimize therapeutic outcomes for older adults.
Karimi et al. (Fri,) studied this question.