Understanding Stakeholder Views Regarding the Design of an Intervention Trial to Reduce Anticholinergic Burden: A Qualitative Study

Background: Anticholinergic burden (ACB), is defined as the cumulative effect of anticholinergic medication which are widely prescribed to older adults despite increasing ACB being associated with adverse effects such as: falls, dementia and increased mortality. This research explores the views of health care professionals (HCPs) and patients on a planned trial to reduce ACB by stopping or switching anticholinergic medications. The objectives were to explore the views of key stakeholders (patients, the public, and HCPs) regarding the potential acceptability, design and conduct of an ACB reduction trial. Materials and Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews and focus groups with 25 HCPs involved in prescribing medication with anticholinergic properties and with 22 members of the public and patients who were prescribed with the medication. Topic guides for the interviews and focus groups explored aspects of feasibility including: 1) views of a trial of de-prescribing/medication switching; 2) how to best communicate information about such a trial; 3) views on who would be best placed and preferred to undertake such medication changes, e.g., pharmacists or General Practitioners (GPs)? 4) perceived barriers and facilitators to trial participation and the smooth conduct of such a trial; 5) HCP views on the future implementability of this approach to reducing ACB and 6) patients' willingness to be contacted for participation in a future trial. Qualitative data analysis was underpinned by Normalization Process Theory. Results: The public, patients and HCPs were supportive of an ACB reduction trial. There was consensus among the different groups that key points to consider with such a trial included: 1) ensuring patient engagement throughout to enable concerns/potential pitfalls to be addressed from the beginning; 2) ensuring clear communication to minimise potential misconceptions about the reasons for ACB reduction; and 3) provision of access to a point of contact for patients throughout the life of a trial to address concerns; The HCPs in particular suggested two more key points: 4) minimise the workload implications of any trial; and 5) pharmacists may be best placed to carry out ACB reviews, though overall responsibility for patient medication should remain with GPs. Conclusion: Patients, the public and HCPs are supportive of trials to reduce ACB. Good communication and patient engagement during design and delivery of a trial are essential as well as safety netting and minimising workload.

Long-term bisphosphonate therapy and atypical femoral fracture: Can you have too much of a good thing?

The long-term, continuous use of bisphosphonates (beyond 5 years) is not wholly without risk. Atypical femoral fracture is an uncommon but potentially very serious adverse event associated with the long-term use of bisphosphonates. Here we consider the complexities of long-term bisphosphonate prescribing, particularly in those that are low risk of osteoporotic fracture, wherein the duration of therapy should be reviewed regularly with individualised risk assessment to ensure the duration of treatment is appropriate.

Preoperative Deprescribing for Medical Optimization of Older Adults Undergoing Surgery: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the evidence for preoperative deprescribing and its effect on postoperative outcomes in older adults undergoing surgery.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

All available studies.

METHODS

We searched EMBASE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), and PubMed from inception to January 12, 2021. Settings included outpatient settings during the waiting period for surgery (ie, preoperative clinic) through to the preoperative period in the hospital. Participants who were older adults, aged ≥65 years, undergoing planned or emergency surgery with deprescribing or medication-related interventions were included for review.

RESULTS

We identified 3 different methods of deprescribing intervention delivery during the preoperative period: geriatrician-led (n = 2), interdisciplinary team-led (n = 8), and pharmacist-led (n = 6). Outcomes were related to health care utilization, patient outcomes, and medication changes; however, results were difficult to compare because of heterogeneous outcomes within the topics. Overall, results were either positive or neutral.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The evidence for deprescribing during the preoperative period for older adults undergoing surgery is weak because of the heterogeneity of intervention delivery and outcomes, inclusion of nonoperative cases in some studies, and low power. This review highlights the need for future research, which may consider the following: (1) interdisciplinary approach, (2) coordination of deprescribing efforts with primary care provider from the waiting period for surgery up to after hospital discharge, and (3) validated deprescribing criteria such as STOPP/START that is easy to implement. It is important to note that results yielded positive and neutral results, not negative ones, which should reassure clinicians to implement deprescribing for older adults during the surgical period. Additionally, policy initiatives such as integrated electronic medical records or increased reimbursement of deprescribing efforts for primary care providers and/or hospitals should be pursued to prevent adverse postoperative events for this population.

Long-term use of antidepressants, mood stabilizers, and antipsychotics in pediatric patients with a focus on appropriate deprescribing

It is estimated that 8% to 12% of youth are prescribed psychotropic medications. Those in foster care, juvenile justice systems, residential treatment facilities, and with developmental or intellectual disabilities are more likely to be prescribed high-risk regimens. The use of psychotropic medications in this age group is often off-label and can be associated with significant risk, warranting critical evaluation of their role. Landmark trials, pediatric-specific guidelines, and state-driven initiatives play critical roles in supporting evidence-based use of psychotropic medications in children. Overall, there is a lack of literature describing the long-term use of psychotropic medications in youth—particularly with regard to neurobiological, physical, and social changes that occur throughout development. Deprescribing is an important practice in child and adolescent psychiatry, given concerns for over-prescribing, inappropriate polytherapy, and the importance of reevaluating the role of psychotropic medications as children develop.

The Association Between e-Health Literacy and Willingness to Deprescribe Among Patients with Chronic Diseases: A Cross-Sectional Study from Jordan

Background: Deprescribing refers to the partnered discontinuation of chronic medications to limit the negative impacts of polypharmacy. Polymedicated patients play a key role in the success of deprescribing efforts. eHealth literacy reflects patients' ability to appraise electronically available health-related information to make informed health care decisions, which partly reflect their desire to deprescribe. Objectives: The current study aimed to explore the relationship between eHealth literacy and willingness to deprescribe among patients with chronic diseases. Additionally, the predictors of willingness to deprescribe were examined. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted among adult patients with chronic diseases in Jordan. An online questionnaire comprising two validated tools, namely the Electronic Health Literacy Scale (eHEALS) and the Revised Patients' Attitudes Toward Deprescribing (rPATD) Questionnaire, was used for data collection. The questionnaire targeted adult patients with chronic medical conditions in Jordan and was posted to social media portals, following a convenience sampling technique. Results: A total of 719 responses were recorded and included in the final analysis. Participants with higher levels of eHealth literacy were more willing to get their medications deprescribed, as indicated by the perceived use of unneeded medications (p = 0.042). Meanwhile, participants with low levels of eHealth literacy were more likely to report fear of missing out on the potential benefits of deprescribed medications (p = 0.003). Other items that were commonly agreed upon by both the low and high eHealth literacy groups, respectively, included desire for dose reduction (p < 0.001, p < 0.001), belief in the lack of effectiveness of some prescribed medications (p < 0.001,p < 0.001), and fear of precipitating side effects (p = 0.001,p = 0.007). Conclusions: The present study highlighted the relationship between eHealth literacy and a number of items reflecting willingness to deprescribe, and these indicators can be used to guide future deprescribing efforts among eligible patients.

Antimuscarinic Anticholinergic Medications in Parkinson Disease: To Prescribe or Deprescribe?

The relative importance of antimuscarinic anticholinergic medications for Parkinson's disease (PD) declined after the introduction of levodopa, such that anticholinergic medications are now much more likely to be prescribed for clinical indications other than parkinsonism. Recent studies have found an association between anticholinergic medication exposure and future risk of dementia in older individuals and those with PD. These findings provide a further reason to avoid the use of anticholinergic medications to treat motor symptoms of PD. More importantly, they raise the question of whether one of the goals of PD treatment should be to deprescribe all medications with anticholinergic properties, regardless of their indication, to reduce dementia risk. In this review, we discuss the use of anticholinergic medications in PD, the evidence supporting the association between anticholinergic medications and future dementia risk, and the potential implications of these findings for clinical care in PD.

Prospective cohort study of nonspecific deprescribing in older medical inpatients being discharged to a nursing home

Background:

Older patients from nursing homes are commonly exposed to polypharmacy before a hospital admission. Deprescribing has been promoted as a solution to this problem, though systematic reviews have not found benefit. The aim of this study was to understand if in-hospital deprescribing of certain classes of medications is associated with certain benefits or risks.

Methods:

We conducted a prospective, multicentre, cohort study in 239 medical inpatients ⩾75 years (mean age 87.4 years) who were exposed to polypharmacy (⩾5 medications) prior to admission and discharged to a nursing home for permanent placement. Patients were categorised by whether deprescribing occurred, mortality and readmissions were assessed 30 and 90 days after hospital discharge. The EQ-5D-5 L health survey assessed changes in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) at 90 days, with comparison to EQ-5D-5 L results at day 30. Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to investigate associations between patterns of prescribed and deprescribed medications and mortality.

Results:

Patients for whom deprescribing occurred had a higher Charlson Index; there were no differences between the groups in principal diagnosis, total or Beers list number of medications on admission. The number of Beers list medications increased in both groups before discharge. Patients who had medications deprescribed had nonsignificantly greater odds of dying within 90 days [odds ration (OR) = 3.23 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68, 14.92; p = 0.136]. Deprescribing of certain classes was associated with higher 90-day mortality: antihypertensives (OR = 2.27, 95% CI: 1.004, 5; p = 0.049) and statins (OR = 5, 95% CI: 1.61, 14.28; p = 0.005). Readmissions and 1-year mortality rates were similar. There was no deterioration in HRQOL when medications were deprescribed. LCA showed that patients with the least medication changes had the lowest mortality.

Conclusion:

Deprescribing certain classes of medications during hospitalisation was associated with worse mortality, but not readmissions or overall HRQOL. Larger controlled deprescribing studies targeting specific medications are warranted to further investigate these findings.

This study was registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN1 2616001336471.

Plain language summary

Background: When an older person living in a nursing home is admitted to hospital, does stopping long-term medications help them?

Many older people from nursing homes take a large number of medications each day to treat symptoms and prevent adverse events. “Polypharmacy” is a term used to describe taking multiple long-term medications, and it is associated with many negative outcomes such as increased number of falls, cognitive decline, hospital readmission, even death. Deprescribing of nonessential medications – whether stopping or reducing the dose – is promoted as good hospital practice and is assumed to help older frail people live longer and feel better. However, we often don’t fully understand what is and is not essential.

We wanted to better understand the effect of deprescribing long-term medications for older frail patients during an unplanned hospital admission as they were going to a nursing home to live.

Methods: While admitted to hospital, medications are often reviewed by a clinical pharmacist and specialist physician. Sometimes medications are ceased; sometimes they are not. This gave us the opportunity to study two groups of older frail people from nursing homes: those who had regular, long-term medications ceased or reduced and those who did not. We wanted to see if one group did better. For example, did they feel worse if we stopped certain medications? Did they suffer other bad events compared with those patients for whom no medications were ceased? Were they readmitted to hospital earlier or more often?

Results and conclusion: Despite the assumption that stopping medications for this type of patient is good practice, we found no benefit. We were also surprised to find stopping or reducing certain drug classes (e.g. antihypertensives and cholesterol-lowering drugs) was associated with greater mortality. Larger, randomised studies will better answer these important questions.

Impact of deprescribing dual-purpose medications on patient-related outcomes for older adults near end-of-life: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction:

The decision to deprescribe medications used for both disease prevention and symptom control (dual-purpose medications or DPMs) is often challenging for clinicians. We aim to establish the impact of deprescribing DPMs on patient-related outcomes for older adults near end-of-life (EOL).

Methods:

This systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guideline. Literature was searched on PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Google Scholar until December 2019 for studies on deprescribing intervention with a control group (with or without randomisation); targeting ⩾65-year olds, at EOL, with at least one life-limiting illness and at least one potentially inappropriate DPM. We were interested in any patient-related outcomes. Studies with similar outcome assessment criteria were subjected to meta-analysis and narrative synthesis otherwise. The risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias and ROBINS-I tools for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental non-randomised controlled studies, respectively.

Results:

Five studies covering 689 participants with mean age 81.6–85.7 years, the majority (74.6–100%) with dementia were included. The risk of bias was moderate to low. The deprescribing of DPMs lowered the risk of mortality (risk ratio (RR) = 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.44–0.79) and referral to acute care facilities (RR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.22–0.73), but did not have a significant impact on the risk of falls, non-vertebral fracture, emergency presentation, unplanned hospital admission, or general practitioner visits. No significant difference was observed in the quality of life, physical and cognitive functions between the intervention and control groups.

Conclusion:

There is some evidence that deprescribing of DPMs for older adults near the EOL can lower the risk of mortality and referral to acute care facilities, but there are insufficient good-quality studies powered to confirm a benefit in terms of quality of life, physical or cognitive function, health service utilisation and adverse events.

Plain Language Summary

What is the health impact of withdrawal or dose reduction of medication used for disease prevention and symptom control in older adults near end-of-life?

Introduction: Older adults (aged ⩾ 65 years) with advanced diseases such as cancer, dementia, and organ failure tend to have a limited life expectancy. With the progression of these diseases towards the end-of-life, the intensity for day-to-day supportive care becomes increasingly necessary. The use of medications for symptom management is a critical part of such care, but the use of medications for long-term disease prevention can become irrelevant due to the already shortened life expectancy and may become harmful due to alterations in physiology and pharmacology associated with age and frailty. This necessitates the withdrawal or dose reduction of inappropriate medications, the process called deprescribing. The decision to deprescribe medications used for both disease prevention and symptom control (DPMs) in this population is often challenging for clinicians. In this context, whether deprescribing of DPMs can improve patient-related health outcomes is unknown.

Methods: Evidence from the literature was reviewed and analysed, and the quality of studies was assessed. Five studies were identified, which had 689 participants with an average age above 80 years and mostly suffering from dementia.

Results: The analysis of these studies showed deprescribing of DPMs lowered the risk of death and referral to acute care facilities at 12 months but had no significant impact on falls, non-vertebral fractures, emergency presentations, unplanned hospital admission, general practitioner visits, quality of life, physical and mental functions.

Conclusion: In conclusion, there were insufficient numbers of high-quality studies powered to confirm whether deprescribing of DPMs reduces adverse events, health service use, or improves the quality of life or functioning in older adults near the end of life.

Narrative Literature Review Guided Approach of Inhaled Corticosteroid de-escalation in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

OBJECTIVE

To review the 2020 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) report recommendations and create an algorithm to assist clinicians in determining which chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients qualify for inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) de-escalation. Data Sources: A literature search of MEDLINE/PubMed from 2002 to August 2021 was conducted using the search terms inhaled corticosteroids, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and de-escalation and review of the reference lists of identified articles for pertinent citations.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Relevant studies and articles were included if they focused on the utilization of ICS in COPD.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The 2020 GOLD report only recommends triple therapy with ICS, long acting beta agonists, and long acting muscarinic antagonists for patients with frequent exacerbations, frequent hospitalizations, or elevated blood eosinophil counts. Despite this clear framework, patients are prescribed ICS without these characteristics. Available evidence suggests that these patients can be de-escalated from ICS therapy without concern for worsening lung function or exacerbations. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: Patients with COPD may be experiencing more risk than benefit on ICS therapy. Clinicians should be knowledgeable on how to evaluate patient therapy for appropriateness and know how to safely deprescribe ICS given their limited efficacy in many COPD patients.

CONCLUSION

There remains no specific guidance on how to de-escalate patients off an ICS when the therapy is not indicated. Use of clinical evidence with stepwise algorithms can be models to approach de-escalation of ICS in patients with COPD.

Patient and Physician Perspectives of Deprescribing Potentially Inappropriate Medications in Older Adults with a History of Falls: a Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

High-risk medications pose serious safety risks to older adults, including increasing the risk of falls. Deprescribing potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in older adults who have experienced a fall is a key element of fall reduction strategies. However, continued use of PIMs in older adults is common, and clinicians may face substantial deprescribing barriers.

OBJECTIVE

Explore patient and clinician experiences with and perceptions of deprescribing PIMs in patients with a history of falls.

DESIGN

We led guided patient feedback sessions to explore deprescribing scenarios with patient stakeholders and conducted semi-structured interviews with primary care physicians (PCPs) to explore knowledge and awareness of fall risk guidelines, deprescribing experiences, and barriers and facilitators to deprescribing.

PARTICIPANTS

PCPs from Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) and patient members of the KPSC Regional Patient Advisory Committee.

APPROACH

We used maximum variation sampling to identify PCPs with patients who had a fall, then categorized the resulting PIM dispense distribution for those patients into high and low frequency. We analyzed the data using a hybrid deductive-inductive approach. Coders applied initial deductively derived codes to the data, simultaneously using an open-code inductive approach to capture emergent themes.

KEY RESULTS

Physicians perceived deprescribing discussions as potentially contentious, even among patients with falls. Physicians reported varying comfort levels with deprescribing strategies: some felt that the conversations might be better suited to others (e.g., pharmacists), while others had well-planned negotiation strategies. Patients reported lack of clarity as to the reasons and goals of deprescribing and poor understanding of the seriousness of falls.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that key barriers to deprescribing include PCP trepidation about raising a contentious topic and insufficient patient awareness of the potential seriousness of falls. Findings suggest the need for multifaceted, multilevel deprescribing approaches with clinician training strategies, patient educational resources, and a focus on building trusting patient-clinician relationships.

Development of Patient Education Material for Proton Pump Inhibitor Deprescribing: A Mixed-Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) deprescribing is recommended in case of inappropriate use. Patient education materials are key elements in the deprescribing process.

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to develop patient education material for PPI deprescribing in primary care in France.

METHODS

This was a mixed-methods study involving (1) a literature review of the existing patient education materials on PPI deprescribing to identify key points to optimize the layout and content of the document; (2) development of a first version of the brochure by a pluri-professional steering group, following the national reference methodology of the French National Authority for Health (Haute Autorité de Santé) and iterative modifications of the patient brochure; (3) assessment of the content and understandability of the brochure by questionnaires followed by semistructured interviews with target patients; and (4) iterative brochure readability assessment with the Flesch reading ease tool.

RESULTS

The final patient education material is a double-sided A3 brochure-that is, 4 A4 pages. The first round of user testing by questionnaire (n = 14 patients) led to modifications to improve the document understandability, validated in the second round of user testing by questionnaire (n = 10 patients). The semistructured interviews (n = 10 patients) highlighted an adequate comprehension, whereas actionability required some minor modifications. The readability test score of the final education brochure was 59.4.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

This patient education brochure for PPI deprescribing is targeted to patients in primary care. Its impact on PPI deprescribing will be assessed in a population-based pragmatic trial in primary care.

Hospital admission as a deprescribing triage point for patients discharged to Residential Aged Care Facilities

BACKGROUND

Deprescribing may benefit older frail patients experiencing polypharmacy. We investigated the scope for deprescribing in acutely hospitalised patients and the long-term implications of continuation of medications that could potentially be deprescribed.

METHODS

Acutely hospitalised patients (n = 170) discharged to Residential Aged Care Facilities, ≥75 years and receiving ≥5 regular medications were assessed during admission to determine eligibility for deprescribing of key drug classes, along with the actual incidence of deprescribing. The impact of continuation of nominated drug classes (anticoagulants, antidiabetics, antiplatelets, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), statins) on a combined endpoint (death/readmission) was determined.

RESULTS

Hyperpolypharmacy (>10 regular medications) was common (49.4%) at admission. Varying rates of deprescribing occurred during hospitalisation for the nominated drug classes (8-53%), with considerable potential for further deprescribing (34-90%). PPI use was prevalent (56%) and 89.5% of these had no clear indication. Of the drug classes studied, only continued PPI use at discharge was associated with increased mortality/readmission at 1 year (hazard ratio 1.54, 95% confidence interval (1.06-2.26), P = 0.025), driven largely by readmission.

CONCLUSION

There is considerable scope for acute hospitalisation to act as a triage point for deprescribing in older patients. PPIs in particular appeared overprescribed in this susceptible patient group, and this was associated with earlier readmission. Polypharmacy in older hospitalised patients should be targeted for possible deprescribing during hospitalisation, especially PPIs.

Appropriate deprescribing in older people: a challenging necessityCommentary to accompany themed collection on deprescribing

Older people are often taking several medications for a number of different medical conditions. Although physicians prescribe medications to treat diseases and symptoms, there may be also harmful side effects, especially so in older people taking several medications. Unfortunately, regular review of the benefits or risks of prescribed medications is as of yet not part of standard care. Also, data on how and in whom to stop medications in older people are scarce. The reason this is an important area of work is that medication related issues in older people are a common cause of harm, including both expected and unexpected effects of medications. Research to date tells us that to ensure successful implementation of structured and appropriate deprescribing, careful planning within hospital systems is needed. This includes involving different members of the team to ensure the patients truly benefit. The themed collection published on the Age and Ageing journal website offers key articles providing tools to assist decision-making, implementation strategies and multidisciplinary interventions-all with the aim of improving patient outcome and sustainability of deprescribing approaches.

Adapting Medication for Type 2 Diabetes to a Low Carbohydrate Diet

Healthcare professionals in the primary care setting need to be competent to safely adapt diabetes medications when patients with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) alter their diet. Safe prescribing practice is supported through an understanding of the clinical evidence, basic science, and pharmacology of medications. This review article supports clinicians in the practical application of this knowledge to achieve safe practice. Traditional medical training and clinical practice for chronic disease has long revolved around the teaching of intensifying therapy and evidenced based prescribing, a crucial skill when chronic disease progresses. Now that we are witnessing remission of Type 2 Diabetes through nutritional interventions specifically low carbohydrate diets (LCD) we must apply the same effort and thought to de-prescribing as the underlying metabolic condition improves. There is minimal guidance in the literature on how to actively de-prescribe. The American Diabetes Association in their Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes–2021 acknowledges low carbohydrate nutritional therapy (LCD) as a viable option in the management of Type 2 Diabetes (T2D). Thus, the goal of our paper is to help close the gap between the clinical evidence, basic science, and pharmacology of T2D medications to the practical application and teamwork needed to facilitate safe medication reduction in the primary care setting when applied to a LCD. The LCD is an increasingly popular and effective option for managing T2D and can lead to an improvement in the condition, reduced medication burden, and contribute to significant weight loss. Safe initiation of a LCD in patients on medications requires significant monitoring and medication adjustments to decrease and eliminate the risk of hypoglycemia and hypotension. The health care team including clinicians in primary care, nursing, pharmacy and nutrition need to be competent in adjusting diabetes and antihypertensive medications to achieve safe and effective care. The most immediate and important adjustments are to insulin, sulfonylureas, SGLT2 inhibitors, blood pressure medications and diuretics. Interdisciplinary care teams can individualize therapy while following the guidance, which includes monitoring blood glucose and blood pressure closely, decreasing medications that can cause hypoglycaemia and hypotension, evaluating blood glucose and blood pressure data responses regularly, and open access communication with the team. The article is an international consensus document on de-prescribing that was put together by a multidisciplinary team of clinicians.

Deprescribing Blood Pressure Treatment in Long-Term Care Residents

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the incidence of deprescribing of antihypertensive medication among older adults residing in Veterans Affairs (VA) nursing homes for long-term care and rates of deprescribing after potentially triggering events.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Long-term care residents aged 65 years and older admitted to a VA nursing home from 2006 to 2019 and using blood pressure medication at admission.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the VA electronic health record, and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Minimum Data Set and Bar Code Medication Administration. Deprescribing was defined on a rolling basis as a reduction in the number or dose of antihypertensive medications, sustained for ≥2 weeks. We examined potentially triggering events for deprescribing, including low blood pressure (<90/60 mmHg), acute renal impairment (creatinine increase of 50%), electrolyte imbalance (potassium below 3.5 mEq/L, sodium decrease by 5 mEq/L), and falls.

RESULTS

Among 31,499 VA nursing home residents on antihypertensive medication, 70.4% had ≥1 deprescribing event (median length of stay = 6 months), and 48.7% had a net reduction in antihypertensive medications over their stay. Deprescribing events were most common in the first 4 weeks after admission and the last 4 weeks of life. Among potentially triggering events, a 50% increase in serum creatinine was associated with the greatest increase in the likelihood of deprescribing over the subsequent 4 weeks: residents with this event had a 41.7% chance of being deprescribed compared with 11.5% in those who did not (risk difference = 30.3%, P < .001). A fall in the past 30 days was associated with the smallest magnitude increased risk of deprescribing (risk difference = 3.8%, P < .001) of the events considered.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Deprescribing of antihypertensive medications is common among VA nursing home residents, especially after a potential renal adverse event.

Evaluating the Implementation of a Multicomponent Intervention Consisting of Education and Feedback on Reducing Benzodiazepine Prescriptions by General Practitioners: BENZORED Hybrid Type I Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

General practitioners (GPs) in developed countries widely prescribe benzodiazepines (BZDs) for their anxiolytic, hypnotic, and muscle-relaxant effects. Treatment duration, however, is rarely limited, and this results in a significant number of chronic users. Long-term BZD use is associated with cognitive impairment, falls with hip fractures, traffic accidents, and increased mortality. The BENZORED IV trial was a hybrid type-1 trial conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of an intervention to reduce BZD prescription in primary care. The purpose of this qualitative study was to analyze the facilitators and barriers regarding the implementation of the intervention in primary care settings.

METHODS

A qualitative interview study with 40 GPs from three Spanish health districts. Focus group meetings with GPs from the intervention arm of the BENZORED IV trial were held at primary healthcare centers in the three districts. For sampling purposes, the GPs were classified as high or low implementers according to the success of the intervention measured at 12 months. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used to conduct the meetings and to code, rate, and analyze the data.

RESULTS

Three of the 41 CFIR constructs strongly distinguished between high and low implementers: the complexity of the intervention, the individual Stage of Change, and the key stakeholder's engagement. Seven constructs weakly discriminated between the two groups: adaptability in the intervention, external policy and incentives, implementation climate, relative priority, self-efficacy, compatibility, and engaging a formally appointed implementation leader. Fourteen constructs did not discriminate between the two groups, six had insufficient data for evaluation, and eleven had no data for evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified constructs that could explain differences in the efficacy in implementation of the intervention. This information is relevant for the design of successful strategies for implementation of the intervention.

Deprescribing in the Older Patient: A Narrative Review of Challenges and Solutions

Polypharmacy is a major challenge in healthcare for older people, and is associated with increased risks of adverse outcomes, such as delirium, falls, frailty, cognitive impairment and hospitalization. There is significant public and professional interest in the role of deprescribing in reducing medication-related harms in older people. We aim to provide a narrative review of 1) the safety and efficacy of deprescribing interventions, 2) the challenges and solutions of deprescribing research and implementation in clinical practice, and 3) the benefits of using Computerized Clinical Decision Support Systems (CCDSS) and Quality Indicators (QIs) in deprescribing research and practice. Deprescribing is an established management strategy to minimize polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications. There is limited clinical evidence for its efficacy on global and geriatric outcomes. Various challenges at patient, healthcare professional and healthcare system levels may impact on the success of deprescribing interventions in research and practice. Management strategies that target all levels of the healthcare system are required to overcome these challenges. Future studies may consider large multicenter prospective designs to establish the effects and sustainability of deprescribing interventions on clinical outcomes.

Addressing Barriers to Reducing Prescribing and Implementing Deprescribing of Sedative-Hypnotics in Primary Care

Objective:

To describe interventions that target patient, provider, and system barriers to sedative-hypnotic (SH) deprescribing in the community and suggest strategies for healthcare teams.

Data Sources:

Ovid MEDLINE ALL and EMBASE Classic + EMBASE (March 10, 2021).

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

English-language studies in primary care settings.

Data Synthesis:

20 studies were themed as patient-related and prescriber inertia, physician skills and awareness, and health system constraints. Patient education strategies reduced SH dose for 10% to 62% of participants, leading to discontinuation in 13% to 80% of participants. Policy interventions reduced targeted medication use by 10% to 50%.

Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice:

Patient engagement and empowerment successfully convince patients to deprescribe chronic SHs. Quality improvement strategies should also consider interventions directed at prescribers, including education and training, drug utilization reviews, or computer alerts indicating a potentially inappropriate prescription by medication, age, dose, or disease. Educational interventions were effective when they facilitated patient engagement and provided information on the harms and limited evidence supporting chronic use as well as the effectiveness of alternatives. Decision support tools were less effective than prescriber education with patient engagement, although they can be readily incorporated in the workflow through prescribing software.

Conclusions:

Several strategies with demonstrated efficacy in reducing SH use in community practice were identified. Education regarding SH risks, how to taper, and potential alternatives are essential details to provide to clinicians, patients, and families. The strategies presented can guide community healthcare teams toward reducing the community burden of SH use.

Active deprescribing program in chronic kidney disease patients undergoing haemodialysis

BACKGROUND

Deprescribing is gaining attention of medical community to address polypharmacy. Existing deprescribing tools were not validated in haemodialysis population. We designed this study to assess the pill burden of patients undergoing haemodialysis and to measure the outcome after implementation of an active deprescribing program.

METHODS

An evidence based deprescription tool was formulated. All patients who were on dialysis for 3 months or more were eligible to participate. Medication reconciliation followed by medication list evaluation for appropriateness was done for all patients. All inappropriate medications were discontinued followed by monitoring for 6 months for complications. Primary outcome was the average number of medications and pills per patient before and 12 weeks after implementation of deprescribing program.

RESULTS

We enrolled 150 patients to the active deprescribing program. Mean age was 60.4 ± 10.9 years. After deprescription, there were significant reduction in the number of medications from 11 (Interquartile range 8-13.25) to 8 (IQR 6-9) (p < .001) and reduction in the number of pills from 16 (IQR 12.75-21.25) to 11 (IQR 8-14.25) (p < .001). Pill burden accessed using Living with Medication Questionnaire-Visual Analogue Scale score also had a significant reduction from 7 (IQR 5-8) to 4 (IQR 3-5) (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Polypharmacy is a significant problem in haemodialysis patients, which can lead to poor quality of life and health hazards due to side effects of medications. Implementation of a proactive deprescribing program can cut down polypharmacy to a significant extent.

STOPPFall (Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in older adults with high fall risk): a Delphi study by the EuGMS Task and Finish Group on Fall-Risk-Increasing Drugs

Background

Healthcare professionals are often reluctant to deprescribe fall-risk-increasing drugs (FRIDs). Lack of knowledge and skills form a significant barrier and furthermore, there is no consensus on which medications are considered as FRIDs despite several systematic reviews. To support clinicians in the management of FRIDs and to facilitate the deprescribing process, STOPPFall (Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in older adults with high fall risk) and a deprescribing tool were developed by a European expert group.

Methods

STOPPFall was created by two facilitators based on evidence from recent meta-analyses and national fall prevention guidelines in Europe. Twenty-four panellists chose their level of agreement on a Likert scale with the items in the STOPPFall in three Delphi panel rounds. A threshold of 70% was selected for consensus a priori. The panellists were asked whether some agents are more fall-risk-increasing than others within the same pharmacological class. In an additional questionnaire, panellists were asked in which cases deprescribing of FRIDs should be considered and how it should be performed.

Results

The panellists agreed on 14 medication classes to be included in the STOPPFall. They were mostly psychotropic medications. The panellists indicated 18 differences between pharmacological subclasses with regard to fall-risk-increasing properties. Practical deprescribing guidance was developed for STOPPFall medication classes.

Conclusion

STOPPFall was created using an expert Delphi consensus process and combined with a practical deprescribing tool designed to optimise medication review. The effectiveness of these tools in falls prevention should be further evaluated in intervention studies.

Transitioning Focus Group Research to a Videoconferencing Environment: A Descriptive Analysis of Interactivity

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted face-to-face interactions in healthcare research, with many studies shifting to video-based data collection for qualitative research. This study describes the interactivity achieved in a videoconferencing focus group of seven primary care providers discussing deprescribing opioids and benzodiazepines. Researchers reviewed video footage of a focus group conducted via Zoom and assessed interactivity using Morgan's framework for focus group communication processes. Two reviewers categorized the type of exchanges as sharing information, comparing experiences, organizing, and conceptualizing the content, as well as validating each other or galvanizing the discussion with "lightning strike" ideas. The conversation dynamics in this focus group included clear examples of interactivity in each of the categories proposed by Morgan (validating, sharing, comparing, organizing, conceptualizing, and lightning strikes) that were observed by two different reviewers with demonstrated high interrater reliability. Conducting focus groups with a skilled moderator using videoconferencing platforms with primary care providers is a viable option that produces sufficient levels of interaction.

Community-based pharmacists' role in deprescribing: A systematic review

AIMS

Community-based pharmacists are an important stakeholder in providing continuing care for chronic multi-morbid patients, and their role is steadily expanding. The aim of this study is to examine the literature exploring community-based pharmacist-initiated and/or -led deprescribing and to evaluate the impact on the success of deprescribing and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Library and clinical trials databases were searched from inception to March 2020. Studies were included if they explored deprescribing in adults, by community-based pharmacists and were available in English. Two reviewers extracted data independently using a pre-agreed data extraction template. Meta-analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity of study designs, types of intervention and outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 24 studies were included in the review. Results were grouped based on intervention method into four categories: educational interventions; interventions involving medication review, consultation or therapy management; pre-defined pharmacist-led deprescribing interventions; and pharmacist-led collaborative interventions. All types of interventions resulted in greater discontinuation of medications in comparison to usual care. Educational interventions reported financial benefits as well. Medication review by community-based pharmacist can lead to successful deprescribing of high-risk medication, but do not affect the risk or rate of falls, rate of hospitalisations, mortality or quality of life. Pharmacist-led medication review, in patients with mental illness, resulting in deprescribing improves anticholinergic side effects, memory and quality of life. Pre-defined pharmacist-led deprescribing did not reduce healthcare resource consumptions but can contribute to financial savings. Short follow-up periods prevent evaluation of long-term sustainability of deprescribing interventions.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review suggests community-based pharmacists can lead deprescribing interventions and that they are valuable partners in deprescribing collaborations, providing necessary monitoring throughout tapering and post-follow-up to ensure the success of an intervention.