Medication-Related Problems in Outpatients With Decompensated Cirrhosis: Opportunities for Harm Prevention

Abstract

People with decompensated cirrhosis are often prescribed a complex regimen of therapeutic and prophylactic medications. In other chronic diseases, polypharmacy increases the risk of medication misadventure and medication-related problems (MRPs), with associated increased morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. This study examined MRPs in a cohort of ambulatory patients with a history of decompensated cirrhosis who were enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of a pharmacist-led, patient-oriented medication education intervention and assessed the association between MRPs and patient outcomes. A total of 375 MRPs were identified among 57 intervention patients (median, 6.0; interquartile range, 3.5-8.0 per patient; maximum 17). Nonadherence (31.5%) and indication issues (29.1%) were the most prevalent MRP types. The risk of potential harm associated with MRPs was low in 18.9% of instances, medium in 33.1%, and high in 48.0%, as categorized by a clinician panel using a risk matrix tool. Patients had a greater incidence rate of high-risk MRPs if they had a higher Child-Pugh score (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-1.56); greater comorbidity burden (IRR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.02-1.29); and were taking more medications (IRR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.04-1.22). A total of 221 MRPs (58.9%) were resolved following pharmacist intervention. A greater proportion of high-risk MRPs were resolved compared to those of low and medium risk (68.9% versus 49.7%; P < 0.001). During the 12-month follow-up period, intervention patients had a lower incidence rate of unplanned admissions compared to usual care (IRR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.30-0.92). Conclusion: High-risk MRPs are prevalent among adults with decompensated cirrhosis. Pharmacist intervention facilitated identification and resolution of high-risk MRPs and was associated with reduced incidence rate of unplanned hospital admissions in this group.

Figure 1

Flow diagram of patient recruitment and follow‐up timelines. Reasons for missed contact among intervention patients included overseas travel (3 patients), current inpatient (5 patients), transfer of care to another facility (1 patient), and failure to attend appointment/answer phone for other reasons (9 patients).

Figure 2

Proportion of unplanned admissions among intervention and usual care patients during the follow‐up period.