# Development of a High‐Risk Medication List for Australian Residential Aged Care: A Modified Delphi Study

**Authors:** Amanda J. Cross, Madiha Chaudhry, Darshna Goordeen, Juanita L. Breen, Malcolm Clark, Stephanie Daly, Belinda Delardes, Bente Hart, Deborah Hawthorne, Peter J. Hayball, Sarah N. Hilmer, Lisa Kouladjian O’Donnell, MaryAnn Kulh, Kenneth Lee, David F. L. Liew, Stephen Macfarlane, Elizabeth Manias, Anthony Marinucci, Constance Dimity Pond, Helen Rawson, Susan Slatyer, Andrew Stafford, Amy B. Thomson, Kate Wang, Kirolos Wasef, Jonathan Zimmerman, Nadine E. Andrew, Gauri P. Godbole, Louise Lord, Atish Manek, Brigid McInerney, Michelle Steeper, Justin P. Turner, J. Simon Bell

PMC · DOI: 10.1111/ajag.70141 · Australasian Journal on Ageing · 2026-02-26

## TL;DR

This study created the first national list of high-risk medications for Australian aged care to help prevent medication-related harm.

## Contribution

The first national consensus high-risk medication list for Australian residential aged care was developed using a modified Delphi study.

## Key findings

- 26 medications reached consensus across three rounds of expert evaluation.
- The final prioritized list includes opioids, insulin, benzodiazepines, and anticoagulants among others.
- The OZ-ABCD list can be used to identify and safely manage high-risk medications in aged care.

## Abstract

High‐risk medications are medications associated with significant patient harm or death if misused or used in error. This study aimed to develop a national consensus high‐risk medication list for use in Australian residential aged care.

A 3‐round modified Delphi study involving Australian healthcare professionals was conducted. In Round 1, participants indicated their level of agreement, on a 9‐point Likert scale, whether 60 medications/medication classes were considered high‐risk and should be included in a high‐risk medication list for Australian residential aged care. Round 2 included medications/medication classes that did not reach consensus and new medications identified by participants. Consensus was defined as 70% or more of participants responding at 7 or higher on the Likert scale. In Round 3, participants were asked to prioritise medications/medication classes that reached consensus in Round 1 or 2.

In total, 42 participants completed Round 1, and 35 (83%) completed all three rounds. Participants included pharmacists (n = 21), prescribers (n = 15), nurses (n = 5) and a paramedic (n = 1), with representation from all Australian states and mainland territories. Overall, 26 medications reached consensus (21 in Round 1, five in Round 2) and were categorised into 15 medications/medication classes for prioritisation in Round 3. The final prioritisation list was opioids, insulin, benzodiazepines, anticoagulants, z‐drugs, antipsychotics, lithium, sulfonylureas with high risk of hypoglycaemia, chemotherapeutic agents, methotrexate, digoxin, narrow therapeutic range antiepileptics, tricyclic antidepressants, immunosuppressants for transplant and sedating antihistamines.

This is the first, national consensus list of high‐risk medications developed specifically for Australian residential aged care. It can be used to implement targeted strategies to minimise medication‐related harm.

This study developed the first high‐risk medication list specific to Australian residential aged care. The OZ‐ABCD list (Opioids, Z‐drugs and benzodiazepines, Antipsychotics and lithium, Blood thinners, Chemotherapeutic agents and methotrexate, and Diabetes agents with high‐risk of hypoglycaemia) can be used to identify high‐risk medications and support their safe use.

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** death (MESH:D003643)
- **Chemicals:** z-drugs (-), benzodiazepines (MESH:D001569), digoxin (MESH:D004077), insulin (MESH:D007328), methotrexate (MESH:D008727), sulfonylureas (MESH:D013453), lithium (MESH:D008094)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12945874/full.md

## Figures

1 figure with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12945874/full.md

## References

51 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12945874/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12945874