Review of structured guides for deprescribing

Avoiding inappropriate polypharmacy has become increasingly recognised as a safety imperative for older patient care. Deprescribing is an active process of reviewing all medications being used by individual patients that prompts clinicians to consider which medications have unfavourable risk-benefit trade-offs in the context of illness severity, advanced age, multi-morbidity, physical and emotional capacity, life expectancy, care goals and personal preferences. Structured guides to deprescribing include algorithms, flow charts or tables which are patient-directed and aim to guide the clinician through sequential steps in deciding which medications should be targeted for discontinuation. In this narrative review, we describe seven structured deprescribing guides whose stated purpose included the reduction of polypharmacy, their use was not restricted to a single drug or drug class and they had undergone some form of efficacy testing. There was considerable heterogeneity in guide design and content, with some guides constituting little more than a set of principles while others entail detailed processes and sub-steps which addressed multiple determinants of drug appropriateness. Evidence of effectiveness for each guide was limited in that none have been evaluated in randomised controlled trials, that pilot or feasibility studies have involved relatively small patient samples, that intra-rater and inter-rater reliabilities have not been determined and that most have been studied in hospital settings. Which is most useful to clinicians is unknown in the absence of head-to-head comparisons. While most guides have face validity, more research is needed for determining effectiveness and ease of use in routine clinical practice, especially in primary care settings.

Impact of medication review, within a shared decision-making framework, on deprescribing in people living in care homes

Objectives

The key objectives of this study were to quantify extent of prescribing, reasons for deprescribing, common therapeutic groups of medicines deprescribed and adverse events.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was carried out on a quality improvement project where 422 care home residents in 20 care homes received a medicines optimisation review with a pharmacist and other members of the healthcare team (general medical practitioner, care home nurse). Data on number, type and cost of medicines were collected. Statistical analysis was performed to test for differences between pharmacist-only review and the pharmacist plus general practitioner (GP), and to identify any correlation between the original number of medicines and the number of medicines stopped.

Results

Of the 422 patients reviewed, 298 (70.6%) had at least one medicine stopped with 704 medicines being stopped. This represented 19.5% of the medicines originally prescribed (3602 medicines). There was no statistically significant difference between pharmacist only and pharmacist plus GP in terms of stopping medicines. The main groups of medicines stopped were laxatives, skin products and bone protection. There was weak correlation between the original number of medicines prescribed and the number stopped.

Conclusions

This study has shown that medicines optimisation reviews can lead to a reduction in polypharmacy for care home residents through a deprescribing process. Patients' medicine regimens were simplified and optimised while making financial significant savings for the National Health Service.

Deprescribing: is the law on your side?

Deprescribing can feel risky: prescribers need to consider the consequence of stopping a medication medicolegally, particularly where there may be a guideline or accepted practice that suggests its use. This review aims to provide reassurance and encouragement to safely deprescribe. Experience suggests that for many patients the prescribing of multiple medicines is the norm. In the right setting and at the right time, deprescribing provides a real opportunity to minimise side effects and unwanted interactions through patient-centred conversations. How does the prescriber stand if they stop a medication for which there is an evidence-based guideline to use it? This review explores the concepts of clinical negligence and informed patient consent in the context of deprescribing. Using examples from UK case law, the review discusses the legal tests which are applied to establish an action based on clinical negligence and lack of informed consent. It describes the recent changes in law which reinforce the importance of providing information focused on what is material to individual patients. The use of prescribing tools to support safe deprescribing and informed consent are also discussed. When deprescribing is undertaken in partnership with patients, supported by the knowledge, skills and experience of both patient and clinicians and the patient's values and preferences based on clinical skill, judgement and evidence-based medicine, law presents no barriers to deprescribing.

Barriers to evidence-based physician decision-making at the point of care: a narrative literature review

We conduct a narrative literature review using four real-world cases of clinical decisions to show how barriers to the use of evidence-based medicine affect physician decision-making at the point of care, and where adjustments could be made in the healthcare system to address these barriers. Our four cases constitute decisions typical of the types physicians make on a regular basis: diagnostic testing, initial treatment and treatment monitoring. To shed light on opportunities to improve patient care while reducing costs, we focus on barriers that could be addressed through changes to policy and/or practice at a particular level of the healthcare system. We conclude by relating our findings to the passage of the Medicare Access and Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act in April 2015.

New horizons: the management of hypertension in people with dementia

The optimal management of hypertension in people with dementia is uncertain. This review explores if people with dementia experience greater adverse effects from antihypertensive medications, if cognitive function is protected or worsened by controlling blood pressure (BP) and if there are subgroups of people with dementia for whom antihypertensive therapy is more likely to be harmful. Robust evidence is scant, trials of antihypertensive medications have generally excluded those with dementia. Observational data show changes in risk association over the life course, with high BP being a risk factor for cognitive decline in mid-life, while low BP is predictive in later life. It is therefore possible that excessive BP lowering in older people with dementia might harm cognition. From the existing literature, there is no direct evidence of benefit or harm from treating hypertension in people with dementia. So what practical steps can the clinician take? Assess capacity, establish patient preferences when making treatment decisions, use ambulatory monitoring to thoroughly assess BP, individualise and consider deprescribing where side effects (e.g. hypotension) outweigh the benefits. Future research might include pragmatic randomised trials of targeted deprescribing, which include patient-centred outcome measures to help support decision-making and studies to address mechanistic uncertainties.

The feasibility and effect of deprescribing in older adults on mortality and health: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Deprescribing is a suggested intervention to reverse the potential iatrogenic harms of inappropriate polypharmacy. The review aimed to determine whether or not deprescribing is a safe, effective and feasible intervention to modify mortality and health outcomes in older adults.

METHODS

Specified databases were searched from inception to February 2015. Two researchers independently screened all retrieved articles for inclusion, assessed study quality and extracted data. Data were pooled using RevMan v5.3. Eligible studies included those where older adults had at least one medication deprescribed. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes were adverse drug withdrawal events, psychological and physical health outcomes, quality of life, and medication usage (e.g. successful deprescribing, number of medications prescribed, potentially inappropriate medication use).

RESULTS

A total of 132 papers met the inclusion criteria, which included 34 143 participants aged 73.8 ± 5.4 years. In nonrandomized studies, deprescribing polypharmacy was shown to significantly decrease mortality (OR 0.32, 95% CI: 0.17-0.60). However, this was not statistically significant in the randomized studies (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.61-1.11). Subgroup analysis revealed patient-specific interventions to deprescribe demonstrated a significant reduction in mortality (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43-0.88). However, generalized educational programmes did not change mortality (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.86-1.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Although nonrandomized data suggested that deprescribing reduces mortality, deprescribing was not shown to alter mortality in randomized studies. Mortality was significantly reduced when applying patient-specific interventions to deprescribe in randomized studies.

Deprescribing and managing polypharmacy in frail older people: a patient-centred approach in the real world

Polypharmacy is common in people with multiple long-term conditions (LTC) to relieve symptoms and improve quality of life. However, it is also associated with poor outcomes and increased risk of adverse drug events in older people. Older people are seldom involved in therapeutic research, and when the results are applied to those with multiple LTCs, it can increase pill burden and adverse events without necessarily replicating the expected positive outcomes. This article describes a pharmacist-led, patient-centred approach to deprescribing in a 73-year-old diabetic man taking multiple medication, with gastrointestinal (GI) and pain symptoms as well as poor adherence to medicines. The approach considered his perspective and experience of taking his many medicines into account while using the best available research evidence and the clinician's experience. After six visits over 8 weeks, the patient was more involved with self-managing his diabetes, his pain and GI symptoms improved and overall pill burden was reduced.

Prescription and Deprescription of Medication During the Last 48 Hours of Life: Multicenter Study in 23 Acute Geriatric Wards in Flanders, Belgium

CONTEXT

Palliative care for the older person is often limited, resulting in poor quality of dying. Pharmacological management can be one of the components to achieve better symptom control.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the anticipatory prescription of medication for symptomatic treatment and the deprescription of potentially inappropriate medication during the last days of life.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional descriptive study between October 1, 2012 and September 30, 2013 in 23 acute geriatric wards in Flanders, Belgium. Structured after-death questionnaires were filled out by the treating geriatrician for patients hospitalized for more than 48 hours before dying.

RESULTS

Anticipatory prescription of medication was present in 65.4% of cases, 45.5% of the cases was prescribed morphine, 15.5% benzodiazepines, and 13.8% scopolamine hydrobromide. A deprescription of potentially inappropriate medication was noted in 67.9% of cases. The likelihood of anticipatory prescription was significantly higher in cases where death was expected (odds ratio [OR] 19; 95% CI 9-40; P < 0.0001) and significantly lower where dementia was present (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.16-0.74; P < 0.006). The likelihood of deprescription was higher in cases where death was expected (OR 20; 95% CI 10-43; P < 0.0001) and in cases of patients dying from an oncological disease compared with those dying from frailty or dementia (OR 7.0; 95% CI 1.1-45.6, P = 0.042).

CONCLUSION

Anticipatory prescription of medication and deprescription of medication at the end of life in acute geriatric wards could be further optimized. A well-developed intervention to guide health care staff in patient-centered pharmacological management in the last days of life seems to be needed.

Direct oral anticoagulants: New drugs with practical problems. How can nurses help prevent patient harm?

The safe use of anticoagulants requires a delicate balance between the risk of bleeding and the risk of thrombosis, particularly in drug-sensitive patients, such as older people. Recently-marketed "direct oral anticoagulants" are now being increasingly prescribed and administered in the hospital setting. Direct oral anticoagulants have pharmacological properties that are often unpredictable, and inter-patient variability in drug response is high. Therefore, people often require meticulous review and planning to ensure they receive optimal dosing and monitoring. The multidisciplinary medication management of those receiving these drugs needs to be effectively coordinated to reduce the risk of patient harm. All clinical staff, including nurses, doctors, and pharmacists, should be competent in the pharmacology of these drugs, and know which people require individualized care plans. In this study, we introduced important concepts via the use of case studies developed from commonly-seen scenarios at our quaternary hospital. In particular, the important role of nurses in ensuring patient safety in the periprocedural setting is highlighted.

Long-Term Use of Cardiovascular Drugs: Challenges for Research and for Patient Care

Little is known about the benefits and risks of the long-term use of cardiovascular drugs. Evidence from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) rarely goes beyond a few years of follow-up, but patients are often given continuous treatment with multiple drugs well into old age. We focus on 4 commonly used cardiovascular drug classes: aspirin, statins, beta-blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors given to patients after myocardial infarction. However, the issues raised apply more broadly to all long-term medications across cardiovascular diseases and the whole of medicine. The evidence and limitations of RCTs are addressed, as well as current practice in pre-licensing trials, the increasing problems of polypharmacy (especially in the elderly), the lack of trial evidence for withdrawal of drugs, the role of regulatory authorities and other stakeholders in this challenging situation, and the potential educational solutions for the medical profession. We conclude with a set of recommendations on how to improve the situation of long-term drug use.

Statin utilisation patterns in older Australians living in residential care: 1-year prevalence study

Despite controversy over the risks and benefits of statin therapy, statins continue to be commonly used medicines by older people. In a cohort study of participants aged ≥70 years (n = 540) living in residential care, Sydney, we found that the proportion of statin users decreased gradually from the baseline of 33.1% to 31.3% at 6 months (P = 0.13) and to 28.7% over 1 year (P = 0.002). Prevalence of statin use decreased with increasing age, with individuals aged ≥90 years being more likely to discontinue or deprescribe statins. The patterns of statin use did not change according to increasing baseline dose or baseline indication.

Review of deprescribing processes and development of an evidence-based, patient-centred deprescribing process

Inappropriate use of medication is widespread, especially in older people, and is associated with risks, including adverse drug reactions, hospitalization and increased mortality. Optimization of appropriate medication use to minimize these harms is an ongoing challenge in healthcare. The term 'deprescribing' has been used to describe the complex process that is required for safe and effective cessation of medication. Patients play an important role in their own health and, while they may complain about the number of medications they have to take, they may also be reluctant to cease a medication when given the opportunity to do so. A review of previously proposed deprescribing processes and relevant literature was used to develop the patient-centred deprescribing process, which is a five-step cycle that encompasses gaining a comprehensive medication history, identifying potentially inappropriate medications, determining whether the potentially inappropriate medication can be ceased, planning the withdrawal regimen (e.g. tapering where necessary) and provision of monitoring, support and documentation. This is the first deprescribing process developed using knowledge of the patients' views of medication cessation; it focuses on engaging patients throughout the process, with the aim of improving long-term health outcomes. Despite a comprehensive review of the literature, there is still a lack in the evidence base on which to conduct deprescribing. The next step in broadening the evidence to support deprescribing will be to test the developed process to determine feasibility in the clinical setting.

Deprescribing benzodiazepines and Z-drugs in community-dwelling adults: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Long-term sedative use is prevalent and associated with significant morbidity, including adverse events such as falls, cognitive impairment, and sedation. The development of dependence can pose significant challenges when discontinuation is attempted as withdrawal symptoms often develop. We conducted a scoping review to map and characterize the literature and determine opportunities for future research regarding deprescribing strategies for long-term benzodiazepine and Z-drug (zopiclone, zolpidem, and zaleplon) use in community-dwelling adults.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, TRIP, and JBI Ovid databases and conducted a grey literature search. Articles discussing methods for deprescribing benzodiazepines or Z-drugs in community-dwelling adults were selected.

RESULTS

Following removal of duplicates, 2797 articles were reviewed for eligibility. Of these, 367 were retrieved for full-text assessment and 139 were subsequently included for review. Seventy-four (53%) articles were original research, predominantly randomized controlled trials (n = 52 [37%]), whereas 58 (42%) were narrative reviews and seven (5%) were guidelines. Amongst original studies, pharmacologic strategies were the most commonly studied intervention (n = 42 [57%]). Additional deprescribing strategies included psychological therapies (n = 10 [14%]), mixed interventions (n = 12 [16%]), and others (n = 10 [14%]). Behaviour change interventions were commonly combined and included enablement (n = 56 [76%]), education (n = 36 [47%]), and training (n = 29 [39%]). Gradual dose reduction was frequently a component of studies, reviews, and guidelines, but methods varied widely.

CONCLUSIONS

Approaches proposed for deprescribing benzodiazepines and Z-drugs are numerous and heterogeneous. Current research in this area using methods such as randomized trials and meta-analyses may too narrowly encompass potential strategies available to target this phenomenon. Realist synthesis methods would be well suited to understand the mechanisms by which deprescribing interventions work and why they fail.

Developmental evaluation as a strategy to enhance the uptake and use of deprescribing guidelines: protocol for a multiple case study

BACKGROUND

The use of developmental evaluation is increasing as a method for conducting implementation research. This paper describes the use of developmental evaluation to enhance an ongoing study. The study develops and implements evidence-based clinical guidelines for deprescribing medications in primary care and long-term care settings. A unique feature of our approach is our use of a rapid analytical technique.

METHODS/DESIGN

The team will carry out two separate analytical processes: first, a rapid analytical process to provide timely feedback to the guideline development and implementation teams, followed by a meta-evaluation and second, a comprehensive qualitative analysis of data after the implementation of each guideline and a final cross-case analysis. Data will be gathered through interviews, through observational techniques leading to the creation of field notes and narrative reports, and through assembling team documents such as meeting minutes. Transcripts and documents will be anonymized and organized in NVIVO by case, by sector (primary care or long-term care), and by implementation site. A narrative case report, directed coding, and open coding steps will be followed. Clustering and theming will generate a model or action map reflecting the functioning of the participating social environments.

DISCUSSION

In this study, we will develop three deprescribing guidelines and will implement them in six sites (three family health teams and three long-term care homes), in a sequential iterative manner encompassing 18 implementation efforts. The processes of 11 distinct teams within four conceptual categories will be examined: a guideline priority-setting group, a guideline development methods committee, 3 guideline development teams, and 6 guideline implementation teams. Our methods will reveal the processes used to develop and implement the guidelines, the role and contribution of developmental evaluation in strengthening these processes, and the experience of six sites in implementing new evidence-based clinical guidelines. This research will generate new knowledge about team processes and the uptake and use of deprescribing guidelines in family health teams and long-term care homes, with a goal of addressing polypharmacy in Canada. Clinicians and researchers creating clinical guidelines to introduce improvements into daily practice may benefit from our developmental evaluation approach.

Feasibility of a patient-centered deprescribing process to reduce inappropriate use of proton pump inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are inappropriately prescribed in up to 50% of users. Systematic medication review and cessation of inappropriate medications or deprescribing may improve patient outcomes and reduce costs.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of a patient-centered deprescribing process in a population of adults with complex polypharmacy.

METHODS

This was a prospective feasibility study. Participants were recruited from hospital outpatient clinics. The patient-centered deprescribing process consisted of 5 steps: comprehensive medication history, identification of potentially inappropriate medications, determining if the medication can be ceased, planning the withdrawal regimen (eg, tapering where necessary), and provision of monitoring, support, and documentation. Feasibility was determined by assessing time taken to complete the different steps of the deprescribing process and participant feedback.

RESULTS

In all, 57 PPI users were recruited; participants were 70 ± 14 years old and took 14 ± 6 medications. The indication for PPI use was verified in 43 participants and judged as potentially inappropriate in 19 (44%); 8 were suitable for trial withdrawal, and 6 consented. All 6 successfully ceased (n = 3) or reduced (n = 3) their PPI use, and this was sustained at 6 months postintervention in 4 participants.

CONCLUSIONS

The patient-centered deprescribing process can safely reduce inappropriate PPI prescribing in a small proportion of people. Although the process was acceptable to participants, difficulties in accessing complete medical histories, time limitations, and minimal evidence to support effectiveness in certain indications were barriers to implementation of the process in clinical practice.

Drug Burden Index in older adults: theoretical and practical issues

Anticholinergic and sedative medications are commonly used in older adults and are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. The Drug Burden Index was developed to measure the cumulative exposure to these medications in older adults and its impact on physical and cognitive function. This narrative review discusses the research and clinical applications of the Drug Burden Index, and its advantages and limitations, compared with other pharmacologically developed measures of high-risk prescribing.

Minimizing anticholinergic drug prescribing in older hospitalized patients: a full audit cycle

INTRODUCTION

Anticholinergic drugs are associated with poor outcomes in older patients but no specific intervention strategies aimed at reducing anticholinergic drug exposure have been described.

OBJECTIVES

To identify whether a consultant-led medication review targeting anticholinergics would reduce anticholinergic drug exposure [number of anticholinergic drugs and Anticholinergic Risk Scale (ARS) score].

METHODS

The first phase of the audit included 70 consecutive admissions (mean age 84 years, 53 women). ARS score was calculated on admission and after initial consultant review. Re-audit was undertaken on another 70 consecutive admissions (mean age 83 years, 43 women) after introducing a system of informing the responsible consultant of the ARS score at their first review.

RESULTS

Drugs with anticholinergic effects (n = 53) were prescribed preadmission to 45/140 (32%) of patients. Consultant geriatrician review reduced ARS scores (p = 0.01), especially following the introduction of the information system (p = 0.002). In the first arm of the audit, 51 (73%) patients had ARS of 0 after a consultant's review compared with 47 (67%) patients on admission, whilst 67 (96%) patients had ARS of 2 or less after a consultant's review compared with 63 (90%) patients on admission. In the second arm of the audit, 59 (84%) patients had ARS of 0 after a consultant's review compared with 48 (69%) patients on admission, whilst 70 (100%) patients had ARS of 2 or less after a consultant's review compared with 69 (99%) patients on admission. Anticholinergic drugs were either stopped, or their dose reduced, in 35% of patients in the first arm of the audit and in 73% of patients in the re-audit (odds ratio 5.0, 95% confidence interval 1.4-17.8).

CONCLUSION

Consultant-led medication review (standard practice) was effective at reducing anticholinergic drug exposure in the acute setting. A system of alerting clinicians to patients prescribed anticholinergic medications further reduced anticholinergic drug exposure.

A pilot randomized controlled trial of deprescribing

OBJECTIVE

Polypharmacy and adverse drug reactions are frequent and important among older people. Few clinical trials have evaluated systematic withdrawal of medications among older people. This small, open, study was conducted to determine the feasibility of a randomized controlled deprescribing trial.

METHODS

Ten volunteers living in the community (recruited by media advertising) and 25 volunteers living in residential aged-care facilities (RCFs) were randomized to intervention or control groups. The intervention was gradual withdrawal of one target medication. The primary outcome was the number of intervention participants in whom medication withdrawal could be achieved. Other outcomes measures were quality of life, medication adherence, sleep quality, and cognitive impairment.

RESULTS

Participants were aged 80 ± 11 years and were taking 9 ± 2 medications. Fifteen participants commenced medication withdrawal and all ceased or reduced the dose of their target medication. Two subjects withdrew; one was referred for clinical review, and one participant declined further dose reductions.

CONCLUSIONS

A randomized controlled trial of deprescribing was acceptable to participants. Recruitment in RCFs is feasible. Definitive trials of deprescribing are required.

[Systematic elimination of prescribed medicines is acceptable and feasible among polymorbid family medicine patients]

Polypharmacy increasingly is a problem in the care of polymorbid and elderly people, and affects morbidity and mortality. We adapted an algorithm for systematic deprescribing of medicaments (Good Palliative Geriatric Practice, developed for geriatric patients originally), and performed a practicability and acceptance study with 14 general practitioners and 63 patients with 523 medicaments totally. By the intervention 13% of all medicaments could be changed and 9% stopped, mostly (56%) due to an absence of indication. 75% of patients given a recommendation to change a medicament agreed. Acceptance and practicability of the tool were rated clearly positive by physicians. To study efficacy a randomized-controlled trial with clinical outcomes, long-term follow up and the exploration of patients' views is warranted.

People's attitudes, beliefs, and experiences regarding polypharmacy and willingness to Deprescribe

OBJECTIVES

To capture people's attitudes, beliefs, and experiences regarding the number of medications they are taking and their feelings about stopping medications.

DESIGN

Administration of a validated questionnaire.

SETTING

Multidisciplinary ambulatory consulting service at the Royal Adelaide Hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were individuals aged 18 and older (median 71.5) taking at least one regular prescription medication; 100 participants completed all items of the questionnaire, 65 of whom were aged 65 and older.

MEASUREMENTS

Participants were administered the 15-item Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (PATD) questionnaire.

RESULTS

Participants were taking an average of 10 different prescription and nonprescription (including complementary), regular and as-needed medications. More than 60% felt that they were taking a "large number" of medications, and 92% stated that they would be willing to stop one or more of their current medications if possible. Number of regular medications, age, and number of medical conditions were not found to be correlated with willingness to stop a medication. The findings were similar in older and younger participants.

CONCLUSION

This study has shown that a cohort of mostly older adults were largely accepting of a trial of cessation of medication(s) that their prescriber deemed to be no longer required. Because few factors were associated with willingness to cease medications, all patients should be individually evaluated for deprescribing.