Spanish list of potentially inappropriate drugs in the elderly (ES-PIA project)

Tools and guidelines to assess the appropriateness of medication and aid deprescribing: An umbrella review

AIMS

The aim of this umbrella review was to identify tools and guidelines to aid the deprescribing process of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), evaluate development and validation methods, and describe evidence levels for medication inclusion.

METHODS

Searches were conducted on MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase.com, Cochrane CDSR, CINAHL (EBSCO), Web of Science Core Collection and guideline databases from the date of inception to 7 July 2022. Following the initial search, an additional search was conducted to identify an updated versions of tools on 17 July 2023. We analysed the contents of tools and guidelines.

RESULTS

From 23 systematic reviews and guidelines, we identified 95 tools (72 explicit, 12 mixed and 11 implicit) and nine guidelines. Most tools (83.2%) were developed to use for older persons, including 14 for those with limited life expectancy. Seven tools were for children <18 years (7.37%). Most explicit/mixed tools (78.57%) and all guidelines were validated. We found 484 PIMs and 202 medications with different appropriateness independent of disease for older persons with normal and limited life expectancy, respectively. Only two tools and eight guidelines reported the evidence level, and a quarter of medications had high-quality evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Tools are available for a diversity of populations. There were discrepancies, with the same medication being classified as inappropriate in some tools and appropriate in others, possibly due to low-quality evidence. In particular, tools for patients with limited life expectancy were developed based on very limited evidence, and research to generate this evidence is urgently needed. Our medication lists, along with the level of evidence, could facilitate efforts to strengthen the evidence.

Development of a medication review tool for residents in Korean long-term care facilities

INTRODUCTION

Residents in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are likely to suffer from drug-related problems, such as inappropriate polypharmacy and potential prescribing omissions due to multimorbidity and high-level frailty. Medication reviews are thus necessary to identify and resolve drug-related problems in LTCF residents. In this study, we aimed to develop a medication review tool for older adults in LTCFs in Korea.

METHODS

We did a systematic review to identify previously developed explicit criteria and devised preliminary potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) list for the LTCF elderly from previous tools. Each item on this list was categorized into 23 underlying diseases/conditions, and the interventions necessary for each PIM were included. A two-round modified Delphi survey was performed sequentially for consensus evaluation of clinical appropriateness and feasibility of the list items by 12 experts (seven physicians in different specialties and five pharmacists specialized in geriatrics) and seven pharmacists, respectively.

RESULTS

We identified 22 existing tools and devised a preliminary PIM list including 100 items. Ninety-one items were derived from the two-round Delphi survey for clinical appropriateness. In the feasibility test, 77 items were integrated into the final medication review tool for the LTCF elderly. The final list was composed of items relating to PIMs in general (18), potential drug interactions (14), PIMs under specific diseases/conditions (26), a need for dose adjustment (2), and potential omissions (17).

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a disease-category-based explicit medication review tool for detecting PIM use for LTCF residents. This tool may be helpful in implementing medication review practices to assist pharmacists or physicians for the elderly in LTCFs. Further research is required to validate the effectiveness of our tool in clinical practice.

Applicability of explicit potentially inappropriate medication lists to the Australian context: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To determine i) the similarity of potentially inappropriate medications specified in and between existing explicit lists and ii) the availability in Australia of medications included on existing lists to determine their applicability to the Australian context.

METHODS

This systematic review identified explicit potentially inappropriate medication lists that were published on EMBASE (1974 - April 2021), MEDLINE (1946 - April 2021) and Elsevier Scopus (2004 - April 2021). The reference lists of seven previously published systematic reviews were also manually reviewed. Lists were included if they were explicit, and the most recent version and the complete list were published in English. Lists based on existing lists were excluded if no new items were added. Potentially inappropriate medications identified on each list were extracted and compared to the medications available on the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods and Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Schemes.

RESULTS

Thirty-five explicit published lists were identified. A total of 645 unique potentially inappropriate medications were extracted, of which 416 (64%) were available in Australia and 262 (41%) were subsided by the general Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Applicability of each explicit list ranged from 50-96% according to medications available in Australia and 25-83% according to medications available under subsidy.

CONCLUSIONS

Pooling data from different lists may help to identify potentially inappropriate medications that may be applicable to local settings. However, if selecting a list for use in the Australian context, consideration should also be given to the intended purpose and setting for application.

REview of potentially inappropriate MEDIcation pr[e]scribing in Seniors (REMEDI[e]S): French implicit and explicit criteria

PURPOSE

To establish a consensus on both explicit and implicit criteria in order to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in French older people aged 75 years and over or 65 years and over with multimorbidity.

METHODS

Fifteen experts in geriatrics, general practice, pharmacy, and clinical pharmacology were involved in a two-round Delphi survey to assess preliminary explicit and implicit criteria based on an extensive literature review and up-to-date evidence data. Experts were asked to rate their level of agreement using a 5-level Likert scale for inclusion of criteria and also for rationale and therapeutic alternatives. A consensus was considered as reached if at least 75% of the experts rated criteria as "strongly agreed" or "agreed."

RESULTS

The new tool included a seven-step algorithm (implicit criteria) encompassing the three main domains that define PIP (i.e. overprescribing, underprescribing, and misprescribing) and 104 explicit criteria. Explicit criteria were divided into 6 tables related to inappropriate drug duplications (n = 7 criteria), omissions of medications and/or medication associations (n = 16), medications with an unfavourable benefit/risk ratio and/or a questionable efficacy (n = 39), medications with an unsuitable dose (n = 4) or duration (n = 6), drug-disease (n = 13), and drug-drug interactions (n = 19).

CONCLUSION

The REMEDI[e]S tool (REview of potentially inappropriate MEDIcation pr[e]scribing in Seniors) is an original mixed tool, adapted to French medical practices, aimed at preventing PIP both at the individual level in clinical practice and the population level in large-scale studies. Therefore, its use could contribute to an improvement in healthcare professionals' prescribing practices and safer care in older adults.

Prevalence and impact of potentially inappropriate medication on community-dwelling older adults

INTRODUCTION

Potentially inappropriate medication is associated with adverse health and functional outcomes, as well as increased health care costs.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the prevalence and types of potentially inappropriate medication according to the Beers criteria in community-dwelling older persons and to identify the major clinical and functional consequences of potentially inappropriate medication during two years of following.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a longitudinal, descriptive, and observational study that included 400 65-year or older community-dwelling people (48% women) selected by simple random sampling in 2012. In 2014, 372 people were re-evaluated and classified into two groups based on the presence or absence of potentially inappropriate medication through the follow-up period.

RESULTS

In total, 31% had polypharmacy (5-9 medications) and 1,8% had excessive polypharmacy (10 or more medications). The mean of the number of medications was higher in the potentially inappropriate medication group (3 vs. 5.78; p<0.001) and 21.9% still had the potentially inappropriate medication status during the follow-up; of them, 75% had one potentially inappropriate medication and 23% two. The presence of potentially inappropriate medication was more frequent among frail and depressed male individuals with a bad health self-assessment and comorbidities, especially diabetes mellitus and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In the group with sustained potentially inappropriate medication, we found a worsening health self-assessment, increased frailty, a higher incidence of recurrent falls and prevalence of depression, as well as a higher hospital admission rate, ambulatory medical consultation, and more prescribed medications. We did not find an impact on functional capacity.

CONCLUSIONS

We validated the negative effects of potentially inappropriate medication in the long run for the health of older people and, therefore, potentially inappropriate medications should be monitored in primary care services to avoid greater risks.

Drug interactions for elderly people with mental and behavioral disorders: a systematic scoping review

OBJECTIVES

To identify drug interactions of potentially inappropriate medications and mental and behavioral disorders, according to explicit potentially inappropriate medications criteria-based tools.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic scoping review was conducted in February 2020. Study characteristics, potentially inappropriate medications, drug interactions, rationale, and therapeutic management proposed were extracted. The commercialization and potentially inappropriate medications standard as essential in Brazil and in the world were identified. Therapeutic management was proposed for the most cited potentially inappropriate medications.

RESULTS

36 tools including 151 drug interactions, in addition to 132 potentially inappropriate medications with concerns related to six mental and behavioral disorders were identified. Cognitive impairment and dementia were the most frequently disorders reported and antipsychotics, anticholinergics, and benzodiazepines were the pharmacological classes more involved in the drug interactions. Despite the tools recommended risperidone and quetiapine when the use of antipsychotics were inevitable; levodopa + carbidopa for Parkinson's disease; and short and intermediate half-life benzodiazepines; the quality of the evidence needs to be assessed. In this review, sleep hygiene; deprescription; medication review; and clinical monitoring of adverse drug reactions are strongly recommended. In addition, to consider agomelatine, bupropion, moclobemide and melatonin as potential safer options for benzodiazepines.

CONCLUSION

Knowing the clinical conditions or risk morbidities associated with the use of potentially inappropriate medications and management of these medications for safer therapeutic equivalents or non-pharmacotherapeutic alternatives are relevant for patient safety.

Potentially inappropriate medication in acute hospitalized elderly patients with polypharmacy: an observational study comparing PRISCUS, STOPP, and Beers criteria

PURPOSE

To compare the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) in the elderly according to the PRISCUS list, STOPP criteria, and Beers criteria. Secondary, to describe the differences using the three criteria focused on the inappropriate prescription of psychotropic drugs in the elderly.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed at Severo Ochoa University Hospital. The study included 365 patients, aged 80 years and older, living in Madrid, Spain.

RESULTS

93.42% of patients received at least one PIM during hospitalization. Using the PRISCUS list, this changed from 32.6 to 2.7% at discharge. Applying STOPP criteria lowered the percentage from 65.20 to 10.95%, and with Beers criteria from 80.27 to 10.13. Lower Barthel index at admission was associated with an increased relative risk for receiving at least one PIM (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.15-2.80, p = 0.024) using PRISCUS list as a tool in conjunction with STOPP criteria (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.89-2.33, p = 0.037). Polypharmacy at admission predicted the presence of PIMs with STOPP criteria (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.07-2.84, p = 0.001). Regarding psychotropic medicines, 208 patients (56.98%) received at least one psychotropic medicine during hospitalization. A total of 26.30% of patients were treated with psychotropic medicines, detected by the PRISCUS list, and 53.97% and 29.85% with STOPP and Beers, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Explicit criteria are a useful tool for identifying during hospitalization of the elderly patients. As indicated by the results, new research is needed to carry out an adaptation in our country that includes an evaluation of the strengths of the three tools to decrease PIMs and improve prescription in the elderly.

[Usefulness of the summary of product characteristics as a tool to improve prescription in elderly patients]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The Drug Technical Data Sheet should contribute to a safe and effective use of medications in the elderly, providing accurate information on the prescription, on the possible benefits or risks of the medications, or failing that, communicating the lack of information on their use in this group. The aim of this article was to quantify the specific information for people over 65 years of age included in the data sheets of the drugs available in Spain, and enables an adequate prescription in this population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multidisciplinary group reviewed all the Technical Data Sheets of drugs approved by the Spanish Agency for Medicines and Health Devices (AEMPS). The quality of the information was classified into 4 categories: information specifically referring to the population over 65 years old; information specifically referring to the population over 80 years old; recommendations not specific to the elderly; and specific information for the elderly.

RESULTS

A total of 1,462 Technical Sheets were reviewed, of which 48% had information regarding prescription in the elderly. Information on the use in patients over 80 years old was present in 1.23% of the sheets. Only 6.83% of all the sheets reviewed included specific recommendations for the elderly.

CONCLUSIONS

There is little specific information regarding prescription in the elderly in the technical data sheets of drugs prescribed/sold in Spain. To improve knowledge in this field, data must be provided in the sheets that are based on the scientific literature, clinical trials for the elderly, or pharmacovigilance studies focused on this population.