LETTER
Polypharmacy in Skilled-Nursing Facilities
Jack L. Segal
15 April 1993 | Volume 118 Issue 8 | Pages 649-651
TO THE EDITOR:
Kudos to Beers and colleagues [1], but—so what's new? Their conclusions about the inappropriate prescribing of medication in skilled-nursing facilities were the same as ours in the late 1970s [2, 3]. Tragically, little has changed [1, 4, 5]. Perhaps the UCLA banner or the RAND Corporation escutcheon can provide a sorely needed cudgel to those who acquire a significant portion of their livelihood as caregivers in skilled-nursing facilities. I, for one, however, have begun to lose hope.
1. Beers HM, Ouslander JG, Fingold SF, Morgenstern H, Reuben DB, Rogers W, et al. Inappropriate medication prescribing in skilled-nursing facilities. Ann Intern Med. 1992; 117:684-9.
2. Segal JL. National Health Insurance, Panel on Drugs. Testimony before the subcommittee on Health, Committee on Ways and Means, U.S. House of Representatives, 20 November 1975. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1976:1290-4; no. 63-795-0.
3. Segal JL, Thompson JF, Floyd RA. Drug utilization and prescribing patterns in a skilled nursing facility: the need for a rational approach to therapeutics. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1979; 27:117-22.
4. The Little Hoover Commission. Report on the Medical Care of California's Nursing Home Residents: Inadequate Care, Inadequate Oversight. Commission on California State Government Organization and Economy; 1989:1-71.
5. The Little Hoover Commission. Skilled Nursing Homes: Care Without Dignity. Commission on California State Government Organization and Economy; 1991:1-90.
About Letters
The Editors welcome submissions for possible publication in the Letters section. Authors of letters should:
•Include no more than 300 words of text, three authors, and five references
•Type with double-spacing
•Send three copies of the letter, an authors' form signed by all authors, and a cover letter describing any conflicts of interest related to the contents of the letter.
Letters commenting on an Annals article will be considered if they are received within 6 weeks of the time the article was published. Only some of the letters received can be published. Published letters are edited and may be shortened; tables and figures are included only selectively. Authors will be notified that the letter has been received. If the letter is selected for publication, the author will be notified about 3 weeks before the publication date. Unpublished letters cannot be returned.
Annals welcomes electronically submitted letters.
Top
References
Article
