Prescribing omissions in elderly patients admitted to a stroke unit: descriptive study using START criteria

Potentially Inappropriate Medications and Potential Prescribing Omissions in Elderly Patients Receiving Post-Acute and Long-Term Care: Application of Screening Tool of Older People's Prescriptions/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment Criteria

Background: Screening Tool of Older People's Prescriptions (STOPP) and Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START) criteria have been used to detect potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs). These criteria were applied to geriatric Portuguese patients receiving post-acute and long-term care to assess the prevalence and predictors of PIMs and PPOs. Methods: An observational, retrospective, cross-sectional and multicenter study was performed in 161 patients (aged ≥65 years) from eight Units for Integrated Continuous Care. Results: In these studied patients (mean age: 81.6, 64% female, median number of medications: 9) PIMs were detected in 85.1% and PPOs in 81.4% of patients. While PIMs mainly involved the central nervous system and psychotropic drugs (66.5%), PPOs were mostly related to musculoskeletal system (55.3%) and cardiovascular (39.8%) system. A subsequent analysis with logistic regression found the female gender, the hospital provenience, and the number of medications as predictors of PIMs. Predictors of PPOs were the Charlson Comorbidity Index and history of recent fractures. Conclusion: PIMs and PPOs were highly prevalent in the studied patients receiving post-acute and long-term care in Units for Integrated Continuous Care. Therefore, STOPP/START criteria might be an effective tool for improving prescribing quality and clinical outcomes in these frail elderly patients.

Retrospective study of irrational prescribing in French paediatric hospital: prevalence of inappropriate prescription detected by Pediatrics: Omission of Prescription and Inappropriate prescription (POPI) in the emergency unit and in the ambulatory setting

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Pediatrics: Omission of Prescription and Inappropriate prescription (POPI) is the first detection tool for potentially inappropriate medicines (PIMs) and potentially prescribing omissions (PPOs) in paediatrics. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of PIM and PPO detected by POPI regarding prescriptions in hospital and for outpatients. The second objective is to determine the risk factors related to PIM and PPO.

DESIGN

A retrospective, descriptive study was conducted in the emergency department (ED) and community pharmacy (CP) during 6 months. POPI was used to identify PIM and PPO.

SETTING

Robert-Debré Hospital (France) and Albaret community pharmacy (Seine and Marne).

PARTICIPANTS

Patients who were under 18 years old and who had one or more drugs prescribed were included. Exclusion criteria consisted of inaccessible medical records for patients consulted in ED and prescription without drugs for outpatients.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

PIM and PPO rate and risk factors.

RESULTS

At the ED, 18 562 prescriptions of 15 973 patients and 4780 prescriptions of 2225 patients at the CP were analysed. The PIM rate and PPO rate were, respectively, 2.9% and 2.3% at the ED and 12.3% and 6.1% at the CP. Respiratory and digestive diseases had the highest rate of PIM.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to assess the prevalence of PIM and PPO detected by POPI in a paediatric population. This study assessed PIMs or PPOs within a hospital and a community pharmacy. POPI could be used to improve drug use and patient care and to limit hospitalisation and adverse drug reaction. A prospective multicentric study should be conducted to evaluate the impact and benefit of implementing POPI in clinical practice.

Prescribing omissions among elderly Brazilian patients at their hospital admission and discharge: cross-sectional study

Background Potentially inappropriate prescribing for older people has become a global concern, although few researchers have analyzed potential prescribing omissions for this population. Objective This study aimed to compare the frequency of potential prescribing omissions for elderly patients at their admission to and discharge from a university hospital in northeast Brazil, using the validated and adapted Brazilian START criteria. Setting A university hospital in northeast Brazil. Methods This cross-sectional study examined data from patients who were ≥ 60 years old when they were admitted for > 24 h to a northeastern Brazil teaching hospital during June-December 2016. Main outcome measure Frequency of potential prescribing omissions for elderly patients at their admission to and discharge. Results Data from 227 patients were included. The mean patient age was 71 ± 8.23 years. The patients included 131 women (57.7%), and 176 patients (77.5%) presented with a Charlson Comorbidity Index of ≥ 3. Based on the START criteria, the frequency of potential prescribing omissions was 44.1% (100/227) at the admission and decreased to 39.6% (90/227) at the discharge. The most common potential omissions at the admission were beta-blockers in cases of stable chronic angina, and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers in cases of diabetic nephropathy or renal dysfunction. Conclusion The prevalence of potential prescribing omissions among elderly patients remained relatively high at their discharge from a northeastern Brazilian university hospital. The START criteria could be a useful tool to optimize the clinical management of the elderly.

Potentially inappropriate medications in a sample of Portuguese nursing home residents: Does the choice of screening tools matter?

Background Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are often found in high proportion among the elderly population. The STOPP criteria have been suggested to detect more PIMs in European elderly than the Beers criteria. Objective This study aimed to determine the prevalence of PIMs and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) in a sample of Portuguese nursing homes residents. Setting Four elderly facilities in mainland Portugal Method A descriptive cross-sectional study was used. Elderly polypharmacy patients were included in the study and their medication (registered in patient clinical records) analysed using the Beers (2012 original version and 2008 version adapted to Portugal), STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions) and START (Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment) criteria. Data were analysed using univariate and bivariate descriptive statistics, considering a confidence interval of 95 %.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Prevalence of PIMs and PPOs. Results The sample included 161 individuals, with a mean age of 84.7 years (SD = 6.35), 68.9 % being female. A total of 807 PIMs and 90 PPOs were identified through the application of the three set of criteria. The prevalence of PIMs using the most recent version of the Beers criteria was 85.1 and 42.1 % for independent and dependent of diagnosis, respectively. The Portuguese adaptation of this same tool indicated a lower prevalence of PIMs, 60.3 and 16.7 %, respectively. The prevalence of PIMs using the STOPP criteria was 75.4 %, whilst the prevalence of PPOs, using START, was 42.9 %. There were significant differences in the mean number of PIMs detected depending on the tool used. (p < 0.001). Conclusions The application of the studied criteria in an elderly sample enabled the identification of a notable amount of PIMs and PPOs, indicating there is room for improving the quality of care. The variation in prevalence indicates careful choice of the tool is a prerequisite for engaging in medication review. Using START/STOPP criteria enabled a more holistic approach to the quality of prescribing in the elderly, highlighting low levels of cardiovascular risk prevention and abuse of psychotropic drugs, aside with system failures largely preventable by electronic prescribing and alert generation.

Age-Dependent Impact of Medication Underuse and Strategies for Improvement

Background: Medication underuse is common in aging populations and, because of the growing risk for competing deaths, the benefit of preventive medicines gradually vanishes with advancing age, thus limiting their success. Objective: To estimate the optimum time of initiation of the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events, we examined the impact of appropriate pharmacotherapy for different starting ages at which it is implemented. Methods: In the competing risk framework, we obtained the population's life course from life tables, combined it with effect estimates quantifying the real-world effectiveness of secondary prevention, and compared the outcome of patients not receiving appropriate treatment (underuse) with those receiving preventive medicines that have demonstrated a reduction in the transition to serious cardiovascular events (START criteria). Starting at the age of 55 years, the population proportions of the distinct states of the framework were calculated for each year of chronological age in subgroups of appropriate treatment and underuse. These proportions were used over a follow-up period to estimate measures of treatment effectiveness and risks of underuse. Results: Despite increasing relative effectiveness with advancing age, benefits measured by patient-relevant endpoints, such as life years gained (LYG) or gained quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), markedly dropped after the starting age of 75 years, but even at an initiation age of 85 years, QALYs gained exceeded 1 year. Conclusion: Interventions targeting medication underuse may achieve considerable benefits at any stage of later life, while the benefit is probably largest if appropriate treatment is started before 75 years.

Detection of potentially inappropriate prescribing in the very old: cross-sectional analysis of the data from the BELFRAIL observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the prevalence and clinical importance of potentially inappropriate prescribing instances (PIPs) in the very old (>80 years). The main objective was to describe the prevalence of PIPs according to START (Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment; omissions) and,STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions; over/misuse) and the Beers list (over/misuse). Secondary objectives were to identify determinants if PIPs and to assess the clinical importance to modify the treatment in case of PIPs.

METHODS

Cross-sectional analysis of baseline data of the BELFRAIL cohort, which included 567 Belgian patients aged 80 and older in primary care. Two independent researchers applied the screening tools to the study population to detect PIPs. Next, a multidisciplinary panel of experts rated the clinical importance of the PIPs on a subsample of 50 patients.

RESULTS

In this very old population (median age 84 years, 63 % female), the screening detected START-PIPs in 59 % of patients, STOPP-PIPs in 41 % and Beers-PIPs in 32 %. Assessment of the clinical importance revealed that the most frequent PIPs were of moderate or major importance. In 28 % of the subsample, the relevance of the PIP was challenged by the global medical, functional and social background of the patient hence the validity of some criteria was questioned.

CONCLUSION

Potentially inappropriate prescribing is highly prevalent in the very old. A good understanding of the patients' medical, functional and social context is crucial to assess the actual appropriateness of drug treatment.

Application of the STOPP/START criteria: a systematic review of the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in older adults, and evidence of clinical, humanistic and economic impact

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) has significant clinical, humanistic and economic impacts. Identifying PIP in older adults may reduce their burden of adverse drug events. Tools with explicit criteria are being developed to screen for PIP in this population. These tools vary in their ability to identify PIP in specific care settings and jurisdictions due to such factors as local prescribing practices and formularies. One promising set of screening tools are the STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Person's potentially inappropriate Prescriptions) and START (Screening Tool of Alert doctors to the Right Treatment) criteria. We conducted a systematic review of research studies that describe the application of the STOPP/START criteria and examined the evidence of the impact of STOPP/START on clinical, humanistic and economic outcomes in older adults.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of studies from relevant biomedical databases and grey literature sources published from January 2007 to January 2012. We searched citation and reference lists and contacted content experts to identify additional studies. Two authors independently selected studies using a predefined protocol. We did not restrict selection to particular study designs; however, non-English studies were excluded during the selection process. Independent extraction of articles by two authors used predefined data fields. For randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing STOPP/START to other explicit criteria, we assessed risk of bias using an adapted tool.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

We included 13 studies: a single randomized controlled trial and 12 observational studies. We performed a descriptive analysis as heterogeneity of study populations, interventions and study design precluded meta-analysis. All observational studies reported the prevalence of PIP; however, the application of the criteria was not consistent across all studies. Seven of the observational studies compared STOPP/START with other explicit criteria. The STOPP/START criteria were reported to be more sensitive than the more-frequently-cited Beers criteria in six studies, but less sensitive than a set of criteria developed in Australia. The STOPP criteria identified more medications associated with adverse drug events than the 2002 version of the Beers criteria. Patients with PIP, as identified by STOPP, had an 85% increased risk of adverse drug events in one study (OR = 1·85, 95% CI: 1·51-2·26; P < 0·001). There was limited evidence that the application of STOPP/START criteria optimized prescribing. Research involving the application of STOPP/START on the impact on the quality of life was not found. The direct costs of PIP were documented in three studies from Ireland, but more extensive analyses on the economic impact or studies from other jurisdictions were not found.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The STOPP/START criteria have been used to review the medication profiles of community-dwelling, acute care and long-term care older patients in Europe, Asia and North America. Observational studies have reported the prevalence and predictors of PIP. The STOPP/START criteria appear to be more sensitive than the 2002 version of the Beers criteria. Limited evidence was found related to the clinical and economic impact of the STOPP/START criteria.