Tools for Assessment of the Appropriateness of Prescribing and Association with Patient-Related Outcomes: A Systematic Review

A quantitative study on the impact of a community falls pharmacist role, on medicines optimisation in older people at risk of falls

BACKGROUND

The World Falls guidance includes medication review as part of its recommended multifactorial risk assessment for those at high risk of falling. Use of Falls Risk Increasing Drugs (FRIDs) along with polypharmacy and anticholinergic burden (ACB) are known to increase the risk of falls in older people.

METHOD

The impact of a community falls pharmacist within a hospital Trust, working as part of a multi-professional community falls prevention service, was evaluated in 92 people aged 65 years or older, by analysing data before and after pharmacist review, namely: number and type of FRIDs prescribed; anticholinergic burden score using ACBcalc®; appropriateness of medicines prescribed; bone health review using an approved too; significance of clinical intervention; cost avoidance, drug cost savings and environmental impact.

RESULTS

Following pharmacist review, there was a reduction in polypharmacy (mean number of medicines prescribed per patient reduced by 8%; p < 0.05) and anticholinergic burden score (average score per patient reduced by 33%; p < 0.05). Medicines appropriateness improved (Medicines Appropriateness Index score decreased by 56%; p < 0.05). There were 317 clinically significant interventions by the community falls pharmacist. One hundred and one FRIDs were deprescribed. Annual cost avoidance and drug cost savings were £40,689-£82,642 and avoidable carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from reducing inappropriate prescribing amounted to 941 kg CO2.

CONCLUSION

The community falls pharmacist role increases prescribing appropriateness in the older population at risk of falls, and is an effective and cost-efficient means to optimise medicines in this population, as well as having a positive impact on the environment.

Defining, identifying and addressing problematic polypharmacy within multimorbidity in primary care: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Polypharmacy and multimorbidity pose escalating challenges. Despite numerous attempts, interventions have yet to show consistent improvements in health outcomes. A key factor may be varied approaches to targeting patients for intervention.

OBJECTIVES

To explore how patients are targeted for intervention by examining the literature with respect to: understanding how polypharmacy is defined; identifying problematic polypharmacy in practice; and addressing problematic polypharmacy through interventions.

DESIGN

We performed a scoping review as defined by the Joanna Briggs Institute.

SETTING

The focus was on primary care settings.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and Cochrane along with ClinicalTrials.gov, Science.gov and WorldCat.org were searched from January 2004 to February 2024.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included all articles that had a focus on problematic polypharmacy in multimorbidity and primary care, incorporating multiple types of evidence, such as reviews, quantitative trials, qualitative studies and policy documents. Articles focussing on a single index disease or not written in English were excluded.

EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a narrative synthesis, comparing themes and findings across the collective evidence to draw contextualised insights and conclusions.

RESULTS

In total, 157 articles were included. Case-finding methods often rely on basic medication counts (often five or more) without considering medical history or whether individual medications are clinically appropriate. Other approaches highlight specific drug indicators and interactions as potentially inappropriate prescribing, failing to capture a proportion of patients not fitting criteria. Different potentially inappropriate prescribing criteria also show significant inconsistencies in determining the appropriateness of medications, often neglecting to consider multimorbidity and underprescribing. This may hinder the identification of the precise population requiring intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Improved strategies are needed to target patients with polypharmacy, which should consider patient perspectives, individual factors and clinical appropriateness. The development of a cross-cutting measure of problematic polypharmacy that consistently incorporates adjustment for multimorbidity may be a valuable next step to address frequent confounding.

Managing polypharmacy through medication review tools - pros and cons

Inappropriate polypharmacy is a common occurrence in elderly patients, resulting in increased adverse drug reactions, nonadherence, and increased healthcare costs. Medication review and deprescribing are the primary strategies described in the literature for dealing with problematic polypharmacy. To effectively carry out the medication review, various tools have been developed. These tools can support medication review in a variety of ways. Some tools include a list of medications requiring detailed attention, while others guide medical professionals with principles and algorithms for reviewing and prescribing medicines. A third category of tools focuses on tracking and identifying symptoms that may be due to drug-related problems.

Influence of Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use on Older Australians' Admission to Emergency Department Short Stay

Older people in the emergency department (ED) often pose complex medical challenges, with a significant prevalence of polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medicines (PIMs) in Australia. A retrospective analysis of 200 consecutive patients aged over 65 years admitted to the emergency short stay unit (ESSU) aimed to identify polypharmacy (five or more regular medications), assess PIM prevalence, and explore the link between pre-admission PIMs and ESSU admissions. STOPP/START version 2 criteria were used for the PIM assessment, with an expert panel categorizing associated risks. Polypharmacy was observed in 161 patients (80.5%), who were older (mean age 82 versus 76 years) and took more regular medications (median 9 versus 3). One hundred and eighty-five (92.5%) patients had at least one PIM, 81 patients (40.5%) had STOPP PIMs, and 177 patients (88.5%) had START omissions. Polypharmacy significantly correlated with STOPP PIM (OR 4.8; 95%CI: 1.90-12.1), and for each additional medication the adjusted odds of having a STOPP PIM increased by 1.20 (95%CI: 1.11-1.28). Nineteen admissions (9.5%) were attributed to one or more PIMs (total 21 PIMs). Of these PIMs, the expert panel rated eight (38%) as high risk, five (24%) as moderate risk, and eight (38%) as low risk for causing hospital admission. The most common PIMs were benzodiazepines, accounting for 14 cases (73.6%). Older ESSU-admitted patients commonly presented with polypharmacy and PIMs, potentially contributing to their admission.

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.

Anticholinergic Burden and Cognitive Impairment in Nursing Homes: A Comparison of Four Anticholinergic Scales

BACKGROUND

Medications with anticholinergic effects are commonly used in nursing homes, and their cumulative effect is of particular concern for the risk of adverse effects on cognition.

OBJECTIVE

The relation between cognitive function and anticholinergic burden measured with four scales, the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden (ACB) Scale, the Anticholinergic Risk Scale, the German Anticholinergic Burden Scale, and the CRIDECO Anticholinergic Load Scale, is assessed according to the hypothesis that a higher anticholinergic burden is associated with reduced cognitive performance.

METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional multicenter study was conducted in a sample of Italian long-term-care nursing homes (NH). Sociodemographic details, diagnosis, and drug treatments of each NH resident were collected using medical records four times during 2018 and 2019. Cognitive status was rated with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). The prevalence of anticholinergic use and its burden were calculated referring to the last time point for each patient. A longitudinal analysis was done on NH residents with at least two MMSE between 2018 and 2019 to assess the relation between the anticholinergic load and decline in MMSE. The relationship between drug-related anticholinergic burden and cognitive performance was analyzed using Poisson regression model theory. Multivariate analyses were adjusted according to the known risk factors of reduced cognitive performance available [age, sex, history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA), and number of non-anticholinergic drugs] and for cholinesterase inhibitors. In view of the high number of subjects with an MMSE score = 0 among residents with dementia, for this group a zero-inflated Poisson regression model was used to give more consistent results. The association of anticholinergic burden with mortality was examined from each patient's last visit using a multivariate logistic model adjusted for age, sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI).

RESULTS

Among 1412 residents recruited, a clear direct relationship was found between higher anticholinergic burden and cognitive impairment only for the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden Scale. Residents taking an anticholinergic who scored 5 or more had 2.5 points more decline than those not taking them (p < 0.001). Among residents without dementia there was a trend toward direct relationship for the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden Scale and the Anticholinergic Risk Scale. Residents with higher scores had about 2 points more decline than residents not taking anticholinergic drugs. No relation was found between anticholinergic burden and cognitive decline or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The cumulative effect of medications with modest antimuscarinic activity may influence the cognitive performance of NH residents. The anticholinergic burden measured with the ACB scale should help identify NH residents who may benefit from reducing the anticholinergic burden. A clear direct relationship between anticholinergic burden and cognitive impairment was found only for the ACB Scale.

Polypharmacy and precision medicine

Precision medicine is an approach to maximise the effectiveness of disease treatment and prevention and minimise harm from medications by considering relevant demographic, clinical, genomic and environmental factors in making treatment decisions. Precision medicine is complex, even for decisions about single drugs for single diseases, as it requires expert consideration of multiple measurable factors that affect pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, and many patient-specific variables. Given the increasing number of patients with multiple conditions and medications, there is a need to apply lessons learned from precision medicine in monotherapy and single disease management to optimise polypharmacy. However, precision medicine for optimisation of polypharmacy is particularly challenging because of the vast number of interacting factors that influence drug use and response. In this narrative review, we aim to provide and apply the latest research findings to achieve precision medicine in the context of polypharmacy. Specifically, this review aims to (1) summarise challenges in achieving precision medicine specific to polypharmacy; (2) synthesise the current approaches to precision medicine in polypharmacy; (3) provide a summary of the literature in the field of prediction of unknown drug-drug interactions (DDI) and (4) propose a novel approach to provide precision medicine for patients with polypharmacy. For our proposed model to be implemented in routine clinical practice, a comprehensive intervention bundle needs to be integrated into the electronic medical record using bioinformatic approaches on a wide range of data to predict the effects of polypharmacy regimens on an individual. In addition, clinicians need to be trained to interpret the results of data from sources including pharmacogenomic testing, DDI prediction and physiological-pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling to inform their medication reviews. Future studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of this model and to test generalisability so that it can be implemented at scale, aiming to improve outcomes in people with polypharmacy.

Management of psychotropic medications in adults with intellectual disability: a scoping review

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE(S)

Psychotropic medications are commonly prescribed among adults with intellectual disability, often in the absence of a psychiatric diagnosis. The aim of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the extent, range, and nature of the available research on medication use and practices and medication management in people with intellectual disability taking psychotropic medications for behaviours that challenge.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A scoping review of research studies (qualitative, quantitative, and mixed design) and Grey Literature (English) was carried out. Databases included: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, JBI Evidence Synthesis, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, and Scopus. A three-step search strategy was followed, with results screened by two independent reviewers. Data was extracted independently by two reviewers using a data extraction tool with results mapped and presented using a narrative form supported by tables and diagrams to the research questions.

RESULTS

Following the removal of duplicates, records were screened, full texts assessed, and 49 studies were included. Medication outcomes included reduced repetitive, stereotypic, and/or aggressive behaviours. High dosing/prescribing in the setting of an absent/unclear clinical indication was associated with worsening of symptoms for which psychotropics were prescribed. While psychotropics had a role in managing behaviours that challenge, reducing or discontinuing psychotropics is sometimes warranted. Study designs were frequently pragmatic resulting in small sample sizes and heterogeneous cohorts receiving different doses and combinations of medications. Access to multidisciplinary teams, guidelines, medication reviews, staff training, and enhanced roles for carers in decision-making were warranted to optimize psychotropic use.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings can inform prescribing interventions and highlight the need for timely and comprehensive patient outcome data, especially on long-term use of high doses of psychotropics and what happens when reduce or stop prescribing these doses.KEY MESSAGESPsychotropic medications are frequently prescribed for people with intellectual disabilities, often at high doses and these medications are associated with both positive and negative patient outcomes.Work to rationalize psychotropic use has been reported with interventions aiming to reduce polypharmacy or deprescribe a single psychotropic medicine. These interventions had mixed success and risk of relapse was documented in some studies.Limitations in sample size and heterogenous patient cohorts make it challenging to understand the risks and benefits associated with reducing or stopping psychotropic medicines.Patient, carer, and clinician partnerships are critical to advance medication management.

Evaluation of potentially inappropriate medications in older patients admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit according to the 2019 Beers criteria, STOPP criteria version 2 and Chinese criteria

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVES

Potential inappropriate medications (PIMs) can increase the risk of medication-induced harm. However, there are no studies regarding PIMs in older and critically ill patients with cardiovascular diseases in China. Therefore, studies evaluating PIMs in these patients can help in the implementation of more effective interventions to reduce the risk of drug use. Our objective was to analyse the prevalence of PIMs in elderly patients admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) comparing the 2019 Beers criteria (Beers criteria), Screening Tool of Older People's Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria version 2 (STOPP criteria) and criteria of potentially inappropriate medications for older adults in China (Chinese criteria); and analyse the factors influencing the PIMs.

METHODS

This cross-sectional and retrospective study was performed with elderly patients (≥65 years) admitted to the CICU of the Beijing Tongren Hospital in China from January 2019 to June 2020. The PIMs were identified based on the Chinese, STOPP and Beers criteria at admission and discharge. The three criteria were compared using the Kappa statistic. Multiple regression analysis was used to investigate the influencing factors associated with PIMs.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 369 patients who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria were included in this study. According to the three criteria used to evaluate the PIMs, the prevalence was 78.3% and 72.6% at admission and discharge, respectively. The prevalence rate of PIMs determined by the Chinese criteria was 62.1% at admission versus 56.6% at discharge (p = 0.134); the Beers criteria was 53.9% at admission versus 46.9% at discharge (p = 0.056); by the STOPP criteria was 20.6% at admission versus 13.8% at discharge (p = 0.015). Moreover, 28.9% (STOPP criteria), 56.8% (Beers criteria) and 73.4% (Chinese criteria) of patients taking PIMs on admission still had the same problem at discharge. The most common PIMs screened by the Beers, STOPP and Chinese criteria were diuretics, benzodiazepines and clopidogrel, respectively. Besides, the three criteria showed poor agreement. Finally, the stronger predictor of PIMs was the increased number of medications (p < 0.05).

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The prevalence of PIMs in elderly patients admitted to the CICU was high. The Chinese, STOPP and Beers criteria are effective screening tools to detect PIMs, but the consistency between them was poor. The increased number of medications was a significant predictor of PIMs.

Factors related to polypharmacy and hyper-polypharmacy for the elderly: A nationwide cohort study using National Health Insurance data in South Korea

Polypharmacy may cause adverse health outcomes in the elderly. This study examined the prevalence of continuous polypharmacy and hyper-polypharmacy, factors associated with polypharmacy, and the most frequently prescribed medications among older adults in South Korea. This was a retrospective observational study using National Health Insurance claims data. In total, 7,358,953 Korean elderly patients aged 65 years and older were included. Continuous polypharmacy and hyper-polypharmacy were defined as the use of ≥5 and ≥10 medications, respectively, for both ≥90 days and ≥180 days within 1 year. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted with adjustment for general characteristics (sex, age, insurance type), comorbidities (12 diseases, number of comorbidities, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index [ECI] classification), and healthcare service utilization. Among 7.36 million elderly patients, 47.8% and 36.9% had polypharmacy for ≥90 and ≥180 days, and 11.9% and 7.1% of patients exhibited hyper-polypharmacy for ≥90 and ≥180 days, respectively. Male sex, older age, insurance, comorbidities (cardio-cerebrovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, depressive disorder, dementia, an ECI score of ≥3), and healthcare service utilization were associated with an increased probability of polypharmacy. The therapeutic class with the most prescriptions was drugs for acid-related disorders (ATC A02). The number of outpatient visit days more strongly influenced polypharmacy than hospitalizations and ED visits. This study provides health policymakers with important evidence about the critical need to reduce polypharmacy among older adults.

A Systematic Review of the Current Evidence from Randomised Controlled Trials on the Impact of Medication Optimisation or Pharmacological Interventions on Quantitative Measures of Cognitive Function in Geriatric Patients

Background

Cognitive decline is common in older people. Numerous studies point to the detrimental impact of polypharmacy and inappropriate medication on older people’s cognitive function. Here we aim to systematically review evidence on the impact of medication optimisation and drug interventions on cognitive function in older adults.

Methods

A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE and Web of Science on May 2021. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) addressing the impact of medication optimisation or pharmacological interventions on quantitative measures of cognitive function in older adults (aged > 65 years) were included. Single-drug interventions (e.g., on drugs for dementia) were excluded. The quality of the studies was assessed by using the Jadad score.

Results

Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria. In five studies a positive impact of the intervention on metric measures of cognitive function was observed. Only one study showed a significant improvement of cognitive function by medication optimisation. The remaining four positive studies tested methylphenidate, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, folic acid and antipsychotics. The mean Jadad score was low (2.7).

Conclusion

This systematic review identified a small number of heterogenous RCTs investigating the impact of medication optimisation or pharmacological interventions on cognitive function. Five trials showed a positive impact on at least one aspect of cognitive function, with comprehensive medication optimisation not being more successful than focused drug interventions. More prospective trials are needed to specifically assess ways of limiting the negative impact of certain medication in particular and polypharmacy in general on cognitive function in older patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40266-022-00980-9.

Frailty and Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing in Older People with Polypharmacy: A Bi-Directional Relationship?

Frail older adults commonly experience multiple co-morbid illnesses and other risk factors for potentially inappropriate prescribing. However, determination of frailty varies depending on the frailty instrument used. Older people’s degree of frailty often influences their care and treatment priorities. Research investigating the association between frailty and potentially inappropriate prescribing is hindered by a wide variety of frailty definitions and measurement tools. We undertook a narrative review of selected articles of PubMed and Google Scholar databases. Articles were selected on the basis of relevance to the core themes of frailty and potentially inappropriate prescribing. We identified observational studies that clearly link potentially inappropriate prescribing, potential prescribing omissions, and adverse drug reactions with frailty in older adults. Equally, the literature illustrates that measured frailty in older adults predisposes to inappropriate polypharmacy and associated adverse drug reactions and events. In essence, there is a bi-directional relationship between frailty and potentially inappropriate prescribing, the underlying substrates being multimorbidity and inappropriate polypharmacy. We conclude that there is a need for consensus on rapid and accurate identification of frailty in older people using appropriate and user-friendly methods for routine clinical practice as a means of identifying older multimorbid patients at risk of potentially inappropriate prescribing. Detection of frailty should, we contend, lead to structured screening for inappropriate prescribing in this high-risk population. Of equal importance, detection of potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people should trigger screening for frailty. All clinicians undertaking a medication review of multimorbid patients with associated polypharmacy should take account of the important interaction between frailty and potentially inappropriate prescribing in the interest of minimizing patient harm.

A comprehensive look at explicit screening tools for potentially inappropriate medication: A systematic scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To map explicit screening tools to identify potentially inappropriate medication (PIMs), and the characteristics and limitations of these tools. Including PIMs-interactions, therapeutic alternatives and the clinical management of PIMs.

METHODS

A systematic scoping review was conducted in PubMed and Scopus (until May 2021). The number of PIMs listed as essential drugs was identified in Model List of Essential Medicines by the World Health Organization (WHO) and National List of Essential Medicines (Brazil). In addition to reporting the therapeutic alternatives and clinical management proposed by explicit screening tools to identify PIMs, we suggested our own alternatives for the PIMs most frequently reported.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight tools reported 614 PIMs and 747 PIMs-interactions. Limited overlap between the tools was observed: 123 (69.1%) of 178 therapeutic alternatives proposed by the tools were considered inappropriate by other tools, and 222 (36.1%) of the 614 PIMs identified were named as being inappropriate only once. Only 21 tools were developed by a Delphi panel technique associated with systematic review. The PIMs listed as essential medication in Brazil and by the WHO were 30.6% and 23.3% of the total reported, respectively. For the most-cited PIMs, such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, tricyclic antidepressants and benzodiazepines, we suggested the use of non-opioid and opioid analgesics; agomelatine, bupropion or moclobemide; and melatonin, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The next stages in the development of explicit screening tools to identify PIMs include achieving more consensus between them and improving their applicability across countries. Further, it is recommended that tools include PIMs risks and advice on therapeutic alternatives.

The Effect of the NorGeP–NH on Quality of Life and Drug Prescriptions in Norwegian Nursing Homes: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: The effect of the Norwegian General Practice–Nursing Home (NorGeP–NH) criteria has never been tested on clinical outcomes in nursing home (NH) residents. We performed a cluster-randomized trial in Norwegian NHs and tested the effect of NorGeP–NH on QoL (primary outcome), medication prescriptions, and physical and mental health (secondary outcomes) for the enrolled residents; Methods: Fourteen NHs were randomized into intervention NHs (iNHs) and control NHs (cNHs). After baseline data collection, physicians performed NorGeP–NH on the enrolled residents. We assessed the difference between cNHs and iNHs in the change in primary outcome from baseline to 12 weeks and secondary outcomes from baseline to eight and 12 weeks by linear mixed models; Results: One hundred and eight residents (13 lost to follow-up) and 109 residents (nine lost to follow-up) were randomized to iNHs and cNHs, respectively. Difference in change in QoL at 12 weeks between cNHs and iNHs was not statistically significant (mean (95% CI)): −1.51 (−3.30; 0.28), p = 0.101). We found no significant change in drug prescriptions over time. Difference in depression scores between cNHs and iNHs was statistically significant after 12 weeks. Conclusions: Our intervention did not affect QoL or drug prescriptions, but reduced depression scores in the iNHs. NorGeP–NH may be a useful tool, but its effect on clinical outcomes may be scarce in NH residents. Further studies about the effectiveness of NorGeP–NH in other healthcare contexts and settings are recommended.

Potentially inappropriate medications and their effect on falls during hospital admission

OBJECTIVE

to investigate the effect of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) on inpatient falls and to identify whether PIMs as defined by STOPPFall or the designated section K for falls of STOPP v2 have a stronger association with inpatient falls when compared to the general tool STOPP v2.

METHODS

a retrospective observational matching study using an electronic health records dataset of patients (≥70 years) admitted to an academic hospital (2015-19), including free text to identify inpatient falls. PIMs were identified using the STOPP v2, section K of STOPP v2 and STOPPFall. We first matched admissions with PIMs to those without PIMs on confounding factors. We then applied multinomial logistic regression analysis and Cox proportional hazards analysis on the matched datasets to identify effects of PIMs on inpatient falls.

RESULTS

the dataset included 16,678 hospital admissions, with a mean age of 77.2 years. Inpatient falls occurred during 446 (2.7%) admissions. Adjusted odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval (CI)) for the association between PIM exposure and falls were 7.9 (6.1-10.3) for STOPP section K, 2.2 (2.0-2.5) for STOPP and 1.4 (1.3-1.5) for STOPPFall. Adjusted hazard ratio (HR) (95% CI) for the effect on time to first fall were 2.8 (2.3-3.5) for STOPP section K, 1.5 (1.3-1.6) for STOPP and 1.3 (1.2-1.5) for STOPPFall.

CONCLUSIONS

we identified an independent association of PIMs on inpatient falls for all applied (de)prescribing tools. The strongest effect was identified for STOPP section K, which is restricted to high-risk medication for falls. Our results suggest that decreasing PIM exposure during hospital stay might benefit fall prevention, but intervention studies are warranted.

Frequency and Acceptance of Clinical Decision Support System-Generated STOPP/START Signals for Hospitalised Older Patients with Polypharmacy and Multimorbidity

BACKGROUND

The Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions (STOPP)/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START) instrument is used to evaluate the appropriateness of medication in older people. STOPP/START criteria have been converted into software algorithms and implemented in a clinical decision support system (CDSS) to facilitate their use in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to determine the frequency of CDSS-generated STOPP/START signals and their subsequent acceptance by a pharmacotherapy team in a hospital setting.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Hospitalised older patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity allocated to the intervention arm of the OPERAM (OPtimising thERapy to prevent Avoidable hospital admissions in the Multimorbid elderly) trial underwent a CDSS-assisted structured medication review in four European hospitals. We evaluated the frequency of CDSS-generated STOPP/START signals and the subsequent acceptance of these signals by a trained pharmacotherapy team consisting of a physician and pharmacist after evaluation of clinical applicability to the individual patient, prior to discussing pharmacotherapy optimisation recommendations with the patient and attending physicians. Multivariate linear regression analysis was used to investigate potential patient-related (e.g. age, number of co-morbidities and medications) and setting-related (e.g. ward type, country of inclusion) determinants for acceptance of STOPP and START signals.

RESULTS

In 819/826 (99%) of the patients, at least one STOPP/START signal was generated using a set of 110 algorithms based on STOPP/START v2 criteria. Overall, 39% of the 5080 signals were accepted by the pharmacotherapy team. There was a high variability in the frequency and the subsequent acceptance of the individual STOPP/START criteria. The acceptance ranged from 2.5 to 75.8% for the top ten most frequently generated STOPP and START signals. The signal to stop a drug without a clinical indication was most frequently generated (28%), with more than half of the signals accepted (54%). No difference in mean acceptance of STOPP versus START signals was found. In multivariate analysis, most patient-related determinants did not predict acceptance, although the acceptance of START signals increased in patients with one or more hospital admissions (+ 7.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.6-14.1) or one or more falls in the previous year (+ 7.1; 95% CI 0.7-13.4). A higher number of co-morbidities was associated with lower acceptance of STOPP (- 11.8%; 95% CI - 19.2 to - 4.5) and START (- 11.0%; 95% CI - 19.4 to - 2.6) signals for patients with more than nine and between seven and nine co-morbidities, respectively. For setting-related determinants, the acceptance differed significantly between the participating trial sites. Compared with Switzerland, the acceptance was higher in Ireland (STOPP: + 26.8%; 95% CI 16.8-36.7; START: + 31.1%; 95% CI 18.2-44.0) and in the Netherlands (STOPP: + 14.7%; 95% CI 7.8-21.7). Admission to a surgical ward was positively associated with acceptance of STOPP signals (+ 10.3%; 95% CI 3.8-16.8).

CONCLUSION

The involvement of an expert team in translating population-based CDSS signals to individual patients is essential, as more than half of the signals for potential overuse, underuse, and misuse were not deemed clinically appropriate in a hospital setting. Patient-related potential determinants were poor predictors of acceptance. Future research investigating factors that affect patients' and physicians' agreement with medication changes recommended by expert teams may provide further insight for implementation in clinical practice.

REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02986425.

Prescribing-Assessment Tools for Long-Term Care Pharmacy Practice: Reaching Consensus through a Modified RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method

Medicines are the most used health technology in Long-Term Care. The prevalence of potentially inappropriate medicines amongst Long-Term Care patients is high. Pharmacists, assisted by prescribing-assessment tools, can play an important role in optimizing medication use at this level of care. Through a modified RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method, 13 long-term care and hospital pharmacists assessed as 'appropriate', 'uncertain', or 'inappropriate' a collection of commonly used prescribing-assessment tools as to its suitability in assisting pharmacy practice in institutional long-term care settings. A qualitative analysis of written or transcribed comments of participants was pursued to identify relevant characteristics of prescribing-assessment tools and potential hinders in their use. From 24 different tools, pharmacists classified 9 as 'appropriate' for pharmacy practice targeted to long-term care patients, while 3 were classified as 'inappropriate'. The tools feature most appreciated by study participants was the indication of alternatives to potentially inappropriate medication. Lack of time and/or pharmacists and limited access to clinical information seems to be the most relevant hinders for prescribing-assessment tools used in daily practice.

Comparison of pharmacists' scoring of fall risk to other fall risk assessments

OBJECTIVES

Given their professional education and participation within the health care system, pharmacists are ideal candidates to assess drug-associated fall risk for patients. The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether pharmacists can quantitatively differentiate individuals who reported falling within the previous year (fallers) from those who do not (nonfallers), and to compare the pharmacists' evaluation with 2 recently published fall risk assessments.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional design of pharmacists' assessments of fall risk.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This is a cross-sectional study where 6 licensed pharmacists evaluated patient records from Wave 1 of the National Social Life, Health and Aging Project dataset using generic drug list (drug counts), age, and body mass index to generate a Pharmacist Risk Score (PRS) based on these variables. Pharmacists were allowed to use drug information resources and were provided with a simple 5-point scale to assist them in scoring patients.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measure of this study was a comparison of the following fall risk assessments (PRS, drug counts, Medication-Based Index of Physical Function, Quantitative Drug Index, and Timed Up and Go [TUG]) capacity to differentiate fallers from nonfallers.

RESULTS

Each fall risk assessment was highly correlated (P < 0.001) with the number of reported falls. Drug-associated fall risk assessments were highly correlated (P < 0.001) with each other, but not with TUG. Each fall risk assessment differentiated fallers from nonfallers based on logistic regression (P ≤ 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was significant (P ≤ 0.002) for each assessment. The comparison of ROC area under the curve for the fall risk assessments found no significant difference between the PRS and other assessments.

CONCLUSION

Fall risk assessment by pharmacists was comparable with other fall risk assessments in distinguishing fallers from nonfallers.

The appropriateness of antiplatelet and anticoagulant drug prescriptions in hospitalized patients in an internal medicine ward

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy increases the risk of potentially inappropriate prescribing. STOPP&START criteria identify a group of drugs representing inappropriate medication and a group of drugs representing potential prescribing omissions.

AIMS

To evaluate the appropriateness of prescription of antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs in a sample of patients admitted to an internal medicine ward and their impact on three different outcomes: length of hospitalization, intra-hospital death, and risk of re-admission in the hospital.

METHODS

We analyzed a cohort of 485 inpatients followed for 1 year after discharge from the hospital.

RESULTS

The study sample had a mean age of 70.4 ± 17.6 years, and 48.9% were female. Clinical indication for antiplatelet was not appropriate in 41.2% of the subjects. Anticoagulant therapy was not appropriate in 22.8% of the subjects: there was incorrect clinical indication in 5/33 and inappropriate dosing in 28/33. START criteria for antiplatelet drug, but neither STOPP criteria for antiplatelet nor for anticoagulant was positively associated with the length of hospitalization (t = 3.08, p < 0.01). START criteria for anticoagulant medication were associated with greater odds of intra-hospital mortality (OR 5.16, 95% CI 1.92-13.85, p < 0.0001) and with lower odds of re-admission to the hospital within 12 months (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.18-0.80, p < 0.01).

DISCUSSION

The non-prescription of antiplatelet is associated with longer length of hospitalization. The presence of START criteria for anticoagulant is associated with increased risk of intra-hospital death.

CONCLUSIONS

The appropriateness of prescription is a global burden especially in older subjects, while it increases the risk of fatal and non-fatal complications, side effects, and, consequently, higher health-care costs.

"Drugs to avoid" to improve quality use of medicines: how is Australia faring?

BACKGROUND

Each year, the French independent bulletin Prescrire publishes a list of medicines, "Drugs to avoid", that should not be used in clinical practice as their risk-to-benefit ratio is unfavourable. This study assessed the market approval, reimbursement and use of these medicines in Australia.

METHODS

The approval status of the medicines included in 2019 Prescrire "Drugs to avoid" list was assessed by searching the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods website. Funding status was assessed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) website, the Australian public insurance system. Use levels were determined by examining governmental reports on prescribing rates including the Australian Statistics on Medicines (ASM) reports, drug use reports released by the Drug Utilisation Sub Committee (DUSC) and PBS statistics.

RESULTS

Of the 93 medicines included in the Prescrire 2019 "Drug to avoid" list included, 57 (61%) were approved in Australia in 2019 including 9 (16%) that were sold as over-the-counter medicines, 35 (38%) were listed on the PBS, 22 (24%) were registered but not listed on the PBS. Although most of these medicines were used infrequently, 16 (46%) had substantial use despite serious safety concerns. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors were used by 22% of patients receiving a treatment for diabetes in 2016. More than 50,000 patients received an anti-dementia medicine in 2014, a 19% increase since 2009. Denosumab became the 8th medicine, in terms of total sales, funded by the Australian Government in 2017-2018.

CONCLUSIONS

Prescrire's assessments provide a reliable external benchmark to assess the current use of medicines in Australia. Sixteen "drugs to avoid", judged to be more harmful than beneficial based on systematic, independent evidence reviews, are in substantial use in Australia. These results raise serious concerns about the awareness of Australian clinicians of medicine safety and efficacy. Medicines safety has become an Australian National Health Priority. Regulatory and reimbursement agencies should review the marketing and funding status of medicines which have not been shown to provide an efficacy and safety at least similar to alternative therapeutic options.

Pharmacist-led intervention on the reduction of inappropriate medication use in patients with heart failure: A systematic review of randomized trials and non-randomized intervention studies

BACKGROUND

Polipharmacy has been identified as a contributing factor to the high hospital readmission rates of heart failure (HF) patients. Nevertheless, there limited evidence on pharmacist-led intervention on the reduction of inappropriate medication use in patients.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the available evidence resulting from interventions, led by pharmacists (alone or as part of a professional team), aimed at reducing inappropriate medications in patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE through PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Scopus until June 2020. We reviewed both randomized controlled trials and non-randomized intervention studies.The quality of evidence was assessed in accordance with the modified Cochrane Collaboration tool to assess risk of bias for randomized controlled trials. The search and extraction process followed PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Of the 4367 records screening, 9 studies were included in the analysis. In 4 (44.4%) studies, the intervention was carried out by a pharmacist working together with a physician; in 4 (44.4%) the intervention was carried out by a pharmacist alone, and in 1 study, the pharmacist collaborated with a nurse. Only 5 (55.5%) studies described the utilization of guidelines or recommendations to carry out the deprescription, and 3 of these showed improved clinical outcomes in the interventional group compared to the control group. The other studies (4, 44.4%) did not follow a specific guideline or recommendation to evaluate the appropriateness of medication, and none of them showed statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes between interventional and control groups.

CONCLUSION

Only those studies where pharmacists evaluated the appropriateness of treatment to specific HF guidelines showed significant differences in patients' clinical outcomes. The development and validation of a specific tool to evaluate medication appropriateness in patients with HF, could contribute to the improvement of patient health.

Comparison of adaptive versions of the Hong Kong-specific criteria and 2015 Beers criteria for assessing potentially inappropriate medication use in Hong Kong older patients

BACKGROUND

The Hong Kong-specific criteria have been established in 2019 to assess potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in older adults and improve the local prescribing quality. The aim of this study was to compare the adaptive versions of the Hong Kong-specific criteria and 2015 Beers criteria for assessing the prevalence and correlates of PIM use in Hong Kong older patients.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014 using the Hospital Authority (HA) database. A total of 489,301 older patients aged 65 years and older visiting general outpatient clinics (GOPCs) during the study period were included in the study. Two categories of PIM use included in the Hong Kong-specific criteria and 2015 Beers criteria, i.e. PIMs independent of diagnoses and PIMs considering specific medical conditions, were adapted to assess the prevalence of PIM use among the study sample. Characteristics of PIM users and the most frequently prescribed PIMs were investigated for each set of the criteria. Factors associated with PIM use were identified using the stepwise multivariable logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The adaptive Hong Kong-specific criteria could detect a higher prevalence of patients exposed to at least one PIM than that assessed by the adaptive Beers criteria (49.5% vs 47.5%). Meanwhile, the adaptive Hong Kong-specific criteria could identify a higher rate of patients exposed to PIMs independent of diagnoses (48.1% vs 46.8%) and PIMs considering specific medical conditions (7.3% vs 4.9%) compared with that of the adaptive Beers criteria. The most frequently prescribed PIMs detected by the adaptive Beers criteria were all included in the adaptive Hong Kong-specific criteria. The strongest factor associated with PIM use was number of different medications prescribed. Patients with female gender, aged 65 ~ 74 years, a larger number of GOPC visits, and more than six diagnoses were associated with greater risk of PIM use, whereas advancing age was associated with lower risk of PIM use.

CONCLUSIONS

The adaptive Hong Kong-specific criteria could detect a higher prevalence of PIM use than the adaptive Beers criteria in older adults visiting GOPCs in Hong Kong. It is necessary to update the prevalence and correlates of PIM use regularly in older adults to monitor the burden of PIM use and identify vulnerable patients who need further interventions.

Clinical and economic impacts of explicit tools detecting prescribing errors: A systematic review

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Many explicit tools have been developed to reduce prescribing errors and ensure patients' safety. The impact of explicit tools is not well studied. The objective of this study was (a) to conduct a systematic review of systematic reviews listing explicit tools developed to detect prescribing errors and (b) to assess their impact on clinical and economic outcomes.

METHODS

This project includes two related parts. First, a systematic review of systematic reviews listing explicit tools dedicated to geriatrics or internal medicine was performed to develop an exhaustive list of explicit tools. Then, using the list compiled in the first step, a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT) assessing clinical or economic impacts of tools was performed to evaluate their usefulness.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The systematic review of systematic reviews identified 49 explicit tools. The systematic review of RCT, using one or more of the 49 explicit tools, identified 5 RCT using explicit tools as intervention (3 STOPP/START and 2 FORTA RCT). The 5 studies evaluated clinical impacts with 3 RCT identifying significant clinical impacts (falls, activities of daily living and/or adverse drug reactions) and 2 STOPP/START RCT identifying significant economic impacts.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The systematic review of RCT showed that explicit tools can have some effect in improving patients' safety. Further studies are warranted to better characterize their clinical and economic impact.

Mapping of drug-related problems among older adults conciliating medical and pharmaceutical approaches

PURPOSE

To lay the fundamentals of drug-related problems (DRPs) in older adults, and to organize them according to a logical process conciliating medical and pharmaceutical approaches, to better identify the causes and consequences of DRPs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A narrative overview.

RESULTS

The causes of DRPs may be intentional or unintentional. They lie in poor prescription, poor adherence, medication errors (MEs) and substance use disorders (SUD). Poor prescription encompasses sub-optimal or off-label drug choice; this choice is either intentional or unintentional, often within a polypharmacy context and not taking sufficiently into account the patient's clinical condition. Poor adherence is often the consequence of a complicated administration schedule. This review shows that MEs are not the most frequent causes of DRPs. SUD are little studied in older adults and needs to be more investigated because the use of psychoactive substances among older people is frequent. Prescribers, pharmacists, nurses, patients, and caregivers all play a role in different causes of DRPs. The potential deleterious outcomes of DRPs result from adverse drug reactions and therapeutic failures. These can lead to a negative benefit-risk ratio for a given treatment regimen.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

Interdisciplinary pharmacotherapy programs show significant clinical impacts in preventing or resolving adverse drug events and, suboptimal responses. New technologies also seem to be interesting solutions to prevent MEs. Better communication between healthcare professionals, patients and their caregivers would ensure greater safety and effectiveness of treatments.

Adverse drug reactions in older adults: a narrative review of the literature

Aim

To summarize the classification and occurrence of ADRs and identify risk factors and strategies to reduce and prevent ADRs in older adults.

Findings

In frail, multimorbid older adults, who are often treated with polypharmacy, ADRs are frequently associated with health burden and hospitalization. Multiple age-related risk factors, including changes in pharmacokinetics, multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and frailty can increase the risk of ADRs, and different strategies have been suggested to prevent the onset of ADRs.

Message

A multidimensional and holistic approach combining pharmaceutical interventions with a global evaluation of health needs and priorities can reduce the burden of ADRs in older adults.

Purpose

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) represent a common and potentially preventable cause of unplanned hospitalization, increasing morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. We aimed to review the classification and occurrence of ADRs in the older population, discuss the role of age as a risk factor, and identify interventions to prevent ADRs.

Methods

We performed a narrative scoping review of the literature to assess classification, occurrence, factors affecting ADRs, and possible strategies to identify and prevent ADRs.

Results

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are often classified as Type A and Type B reactions, based on dose and effect of the drugs and fatality of the reaction. More recently, other approaches have been proposed (i.e. Dose, Time and Susceptibility (DoTS) and EIDOS classifications). The frequency of ADRs varies depending on definitions, characteristics of the studied population, and settings. Their occurrence is often ascribed to commonly used drugs, including anticoagulants, antiplatelet agents, digoxin, insulin, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Age-related factors—changes in pharmacokinetics, multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and frailty—have been related to ADRs. Different approaches (i.e. medication review, software identifying potentially inappropriate prescription and drug interactions) have been suggested to prevent ADRs and proven to improve the quality of prescribing. However, consistent evidence on their effectiveness is still lacking. Few studies suggest that a comprehensive geriatric assessment, aimed at identifying individual risk factors, patients’ needs, treatment priorities, and strategies for therapy optimization, is key for reducing ADRs.

Conclusions

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are a relevant health burden. The medical complexity that characterizes older patients requires a holistic approach to reduce the burden of ADRs in this population.

Development of an explicit tool assessing potentially inappropriate medication use in Hong Kong elder patients

BACKGROUND

Potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use has adverse effects on health, particularly in elder patients. Various country-specific explicit criteria have been developed to measure the appropriateness of prescribing worldwide. However, it is difficult to apply the criteria developed from other regions to measure and guide the local prescribing practice in Hong Kong. This study aims to develop a Hong Kong-specific PIM assessing tool from previously published criteria and validate this tool using the modified Delphi method.

METHODS

A disease-oriented Hong Kong-specific preliminary PIM list was developed based on nine sets of reference criteria selected from a literature review. Any medication or medication class appeared in at least two sets of the reference criteria as well as its related medical conditions were selected as PIM candidates. After examining the availability of PIM candidates by the Hong Kong Hospital Authority drug formulary, the Hong Kong-specific preliminary PIM list was validated by a two-round of modified Delphi process. Eight experts from different specialties were invited to rate the degree of inappropriateness of each PIM candidate using a five-point Likert scale. The experts were also encouraged to propose therapeutic alternatives and new PIM candidates not covered by the preliminary PIM list. The PIM candidates that the expert panel didn't reach consensus on were excluded from the final Hong Kong-specific PIM list.

RESULTS

After two rounds of the Delphi process, eight PIM candidates remained questionable and thus were excluded from the PIM list. The final Hong Kong-specific PIM list included a total of 164 statements applicable to older adults aged 65 years or above, among which 77 were under PIMs independent of diagnoses, and 87 were under PIMs considering specific medical conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

The Hong Kong-specific PIM list can be used as a quality measure and an educational tool to improve the local prescribing quality. Further studies should validate its association with adverse health outcomes in clinical and research settings.

Potentially inappropriate prescribing in older hospitalized Dutch patients according to the STOPP/START criteria v2: a longitudinal study

Purpose

To investigate prevalence, independent associations, and variation over time of potentially inappropriate prescriptions in a population of older hospitalized patients.

Methods

A longitudinal study using a large dataset of hospital admissions of older patients (≥ 70 years) based on an electronic health records cohort including data from 2015 to 2019. Potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) and potential prescribing omission (PPO) prevalence during hospital stay were identified based on the Dutch STOPP/START criteria v2. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used for analyzing associations and trends over time.

Results

The data included 16,687 admissions. Of all admissions, 56% had ≥ 1 PIM and 58% had ≥ 1 PPO. Gender, age, number of medications, number of diagnoses, Charlson score, and length of stay were independently associated with both PIMs and PPOs. Additionally, number of departments and number of prescribing specialties were independently associated with PIMs. Over the years, the PIM prevalence did not change (OR = 1.00, p = .95), whereas PPO prevalence increased (OR = 1.08, p < .001). However, when corrected for changes in patient characteristics such as number of diagnoses, the PIM (aOR = 0.91, p < .001) and PPO prevalence (aOR = 0.94, p < .001) decreased over the years.

Conclusion

We found potentially inappropriate prescriptions in the majority of admissions of older patients. Prescribing relatively improved over time when considering complexity of the admissions. Nevertheless, the high prevalence shows a clear need to better address this issue in clinical practice. Studies seeking effective (re)prescribing interventions are warranted.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00228-020-03052-2.

Relation between anticholinergic burden and cognitive impairment: Results from the Monzino 80-plus population-based study

PURPOSE

We examined data collected in the Monzino 80-plus study to assess the relations between cognitive performance and ACB scores according to the hypothesis that a higher anticholinergic burden is associated with reduced cognitive performance.

METHODS

The Monzino 80-plus is an ongoing, prospective, door-to-door population-based study started in 2002 among all residents 80 years or older in eight municipalities of Varese province, Italy. To establish the relation between cognitive impairment and the anticholinergic drug burden we recorded the ACB score for each patient at baseline. The relations between ACB score and dementia or MMSE scores were also examined after exclusion of patients taking any antipsychotic.

RESULTS

A sample of 2140 elderly people was eligible for analysis. A significant dose-effect relationship was observed between total ACB score and diagnosis of dementia in univariate and multivariate models. Patients in ACB class ≥4 had about 4.5 times the risk of diagnosis of dementia. A relation was also found between higher ACB scores and lower MMSE scores; patients who scored 4 or more had a mean of 6.4 points lower than those not taking anticholinergic drugs. The dose-effect relationship between ACB score and diagnosis of dementia was not maintained after exclusion of patients using antipsychotics, while the association between higher ACB scores and lower MMSE scores was still present, with patients in ACB class ≥4 having a mean score about 4.4 lower.

CONCLUSIONS

There are clear relations between anticholinergic load and reduced cognitive performance, while the association with dementia remains uncertain. For primary care and geriatric clinicians, an ACB score ≥ 4 can be considered the cut-off to identify high-risk populations who may benefit from the evaluation of anticholinergic burden with the ACB scale.

The role of the State Drug Formulary of Ukraine in providing rational pharmacotherapy for elderly patients

Applying the Classification for Drug-Related Problems (DRPs) of the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe (V 9.00, 2019) allowed to systematize the information on the use of drugs in elderly patients given in the Annex of the State Drug Formulary of Ukraine. As a result of this work, special warnings and recommendations of the State Drug Formulary were presented together with the possible causes for potential DRPs, which they allow to prevent. The lists of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) for the elderly (n = 98), drugs the dosage of which in patients of this age group should be adjusted (n = 127), and drugs that need monitoring (n = 108) were formed. The obtained results can serve as a basis for the development of a specialized geriatric tool to ensure rational pharmacotherapy, in particular in the provision of pharmaceutical care.

Predictors of Mortality in the Older Population: The Role of Polypharmacy and Other Medication and Chronic Disease-Related Factors

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy has been associated with increased mortality but the contribution of different medication-related factors to this is unknown.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to identify demographic and medication-related predictors of mortality in the older population. Given the intrinsic link between polypharmacy and multimorbidity, the secondary aim was to examine if the medicines or underlying diseases predicted mortality.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥ 65 years from an outpatient multimorbidity clinic were included. Medication-related factors included the medicines count, high-risk medicines, inappropriate medicines duplication, and potential drug-drug and drug-disease interactions. Logistic regression was used to identify mortality predictors within a year of clinic discharge from the outpatient clinic. Patients attend the clinic until medications and comorbidity management have been optimised, at which point they are discharged from the clinic, and their General Practitioner provides ongoing care.

RESULTS

A total of 584 patients were included (median age 80.0 years) and 9.9% (n = 58) died within a year of discharge. Demographics, namely age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.05; 95% CI 1.01-1.09; p = 0.018) and being male (aOR 5.10; 95% CI 2.63-9.88; p < 0.001); chronic disease, namely heart failure (aOR 3.36; 95% CI 1.78-6.35; p < 0.001); and medication-related factors, namely the number of sedative and anticholinergic medicines (aOR 1.66; 95% CI 1.19-2.33; p = 0.003) predicted mortality in the study population.

CONCLUSION

Whilst polypharmacy has been defined using the number of medicines in the literature, a combination of demographics, chronic disease and medications predicted mortality in our study. This provides guidance for the development of future tools and guidelines regarding the inclusion of key factors for identifying high-risk patients at risk of adverse health outcomes such as mortality.

A pragmatic controlled trial to improve the appropriate prescription of drugs in adult outpatients: design and rationale of the EDU.RE.DRUG study

Introduction:

Pharmacological intervention is an important component of patient care. However, drugs are often inappropriately used. It is necessary for countries to implement strategies to improve the rational use of drugs, including independent information for healthcare professionals and the public, which must be supported by well-trained staff. The primary objectives of the EDU.RE.DRUG (Effectiveness of informative and/or educational interventions aimed at improving the appropriate use of drugs designed for general practitioners and their patients) study are the retrospective evaluation of rates of appropriate prescribing indicators (APIs) and the assessment of the effectiveness of informative and/or educational interventions addressed to general practitioners (GPs) and their patients, aimed at improving prescribing quality and promoting proper drug use.

Methods and analysis:

This is a prospective, multicentre, open-label, parallel-arm, controlled, pragmatic trial directed to GPs and their patients in two Italian regions (Campania and Lombardy). The study data are retrieved from administrative databases (Demographic, Pharmacy-refill, and Hospitalization databases) containing healthcare information of all beneficiaries of the National Health Service in the Local Health Units (LHUs) involved. According to LHU, the GPs/patients will be assigned to one of the following four intervention arms: (1) intervention on GPs and patients; (2) intervention on GPs; (3) intervention on patients; and (4) no intervention (control). The intervention designed for GPs consists of reports regarding the status of their patients according to the APIs determined at baseline and in two on-line Continuous Medical Education (CME) courses. The intervention designed for patients consists in flyers and posters distributed in GPs ambulatories and community pharmacies, focusing on correct drug use.

A set of indicators (such as potential drug–drug interactions, unnecessary duplicate prescriptions, and inappropriate prescriptions in the elderly), adapted to the Italian setting, has been defined to determine inappropriate prescription at baseline and after the intervention phase. The primary outcome was a composite API.

Ethics and dissemination:

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Milan on 7th June 2017 (code 15/17). The investigators will communicate trial results to stakeholders, collaborators, and participants via appropriate presentations and publications.

Registration details: NCT04030468. EudraCT number 2017-002622-21

Anticholinergic Burden and Safety Outcomes in Older Patients with Chronic Hepatitis C: A Retrospective Cohort Study

AIM

Older patients with chronic hepatitis C infection starting direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are frequently prescribed multiple medications that may be categorized as inappropriate. Anticholinergic burden has been shown to be a predictor of adverse health and functional outcomes. Different scales are available to calculate anticholinergic burden. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of anticholinergic medication among older patients treated with DAAs and the risk factors associated using the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden (ACB) scale, the Anticholinergic Risk Scale (ARS) and the Anticholinergic Drug Scale (ADS) and analyze the resulting safety consequences.

METHODS

Observational, retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients ≥65 years old receiving DAAs and taking concomitant medication. This study was conducted in accordance with the Strengthening the Reporting of observational studies in Epidemiology Statement.

RESULTS

236 patients were included. The average age was 71.7 years, 73.3% cirrhotic, and 47% patients took ≥5 medicines. According to the ACB, ARS and ADS scales, 35.2% (n = 83), 10.6% (n = 25) and 34.3% (n = 81) of the patients were treated with anticholinergic medication. Two hundred-and-six (86%) patients presented any adverse events (AEs) during therapy. ARS scale showed a significant relationship between presence of anticholinergic medication and AEs. A large number of patients suffered anticholinergic events, with more events per patient in patients taking anticholinergic drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Older hepatitis C chronic patients are exposed to potentially inappropriate polypharmacy and anticholinergic risk, according to the ACB, ARS and ADS scales. The three scales showed different results. Only the ARS scale was associated with AEs, but the rate of anticholinergic effects per patient was significantly higher in patients with anticholinergic drugs, regardless of the scale used. Consider quality of pharmacotherapy when starting DAA with a multidisciplinary approach could improve health outcomes.

Association of Deprescribing With Reduction in Mortality and Hospitalization: A Pragmatic Stepped-Wedge Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

Deprescribing has gained awareness recently, but the clinical benefits observed from randomized trials are limited. The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of a pharmacist-led 5-step team-care deprescribing intervention in nursing homes to reduce falls (fall risks and fall rates). Secondary aims include reducing mortality, number of hospitalized residents, pill burden, medication cost, and assessing the deprescribing acceptance rate.

DESIGN

Pragmatic multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Residents across 4 nursing homes in Singapore were included if they were aged 65 years and above, and taking 5 or more medications.

METHODS

The intervention involved a 5-step deprescribing intervention, which involved a multidisciplinary team-care medication review with pharmacists, physicians, and nurses (in which pharmacists discussed with other team members the feasibility of deprescribing and implementation using the Beers and STOPP criteria) or to an active waitlist control for the first 3 months.

RESULTS

Two hundred ninety-five residents from 4 nursing homes participated in the study from February 2017 to March 2018. At 6 months, the deprescribing intervention did not reduce falls. Subgroup analysis showed that intervention reduced fall risk scores within the deprescribing-naïve group by 0.18 (P = .04). Intervention was associated with a reduction in mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 0.16, 95% confidence interval 0.07, 0.41; P < .001] and number of hospitalized residents (HR 0.16, 95% CI 0.10, 0.26; P < .001). Pre-post analysis witnessed a reduction in pill burden at the end of the study, and a conservative daily cost saving estimate of US$11.42 (SG$15.65) for the study population. Approximately three-quarters of deprescribing interventions initiated by the pharmacists were accepted by the physicians.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Multidisciplinary medication review-directed deprescribing was associated with reductions in mortality and number of hospitalized residents in nursing homes and should be considered for all nursing home residents.

Pharmacist-led intervention to improve medication use in older inpatients using the Drug Burden Index: a study protocol for a before/after intervention with a retrospective control group and multiple case analysis

INTRODUCTION

Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medication use is common in older adults and is associated with adverse outcomes such as falls and hospitalisations.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study is a pharmacist-led medication optimisation initiative using an electronic tool (the Drug Burden Index (DBI) Calculator) in four hospital sites in the Canadian province of Nova Scotia. The study aims to enrol 160 participants between the preintervention and intervention groups. The Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT 2013 checklist) was used to develop the protocol for this prospective interventional implementation study. A preintervention retrospective control cohort and a multiple case study analysis will also be used to assess the effect of intervention implementation. Statistical analysis will involve change in DBI scores and assessment of clinical outcomes, such as rehospitalisation and mortality using appropriate statistical tests including t-test, χ², analysis of variance and unadjusted and adjusted regression methods.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval has been granted by the Nova Scotia Health Authority Research Ethics Board. The findings of this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at local, national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03698487.

Predictors of unplanned hospitalisation in the older population: The role of polypharmacy and other medication and chronic disease-related factors

OBJECTIVE

To identify demographic and medication-related predictors of unplanned hospitalisation and combine them into a hospitalisation risk score.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥65 years from an outpatient multimorbidity clinic were included. Hospitalisation predictors within a year of clinic discharge were identified using logistic regression. A risk score was developed. The area under the curve (AUC) was used to assess its predictive ability, compared to that of the medicines count (definition of polypharmacy).

RESULTS

A total of 598 patients were included (median age of 80.0 years). 58.0% (n = 347) were hospitalised within a year of clinic discharge. The AUC for the risk score incorporating age, medicines count, heart failure (HF), atherosclerotic disease and systemic steroids was 0.67 [95% CI 0.62-0.71], compared to 0.62 [95% CI 0.58-0.67] for the medicines count.

CONCLUSION

A hospitalisation risk score incorporating demographics, medicines, namely steroids, and diseases such as HF had increased predictive ability compared to the medicines count, providing guidance for developing future polypharmacy tools.

Effect of Clinical Geriatric Assessments and Collaborative Medication Reviews by Geriatrician and Family Physician for Improving Health-Related Quality of Life in Home-Dwelling Older Patients Receiving Polypharmacy: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Polypharmacy and inappropriate drug regimens are major health concerns among older adults. Various interventions focused on medication optimization strategies have been carried out, but the effect on patient-relevant outcomes remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of clinical geriatric assessments and collaborative medication reviews by geriatrician and family physician (FP) on health-related quality of life and other patient-relevant outcomes in home-dwelling older patients receiving polypharmacy.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Cluster randomized, single-blind, clinical trial. Norwegian FPs were recruited from March 17, 2015, to March 16, 2017, to participate in the trial with their eligible patients. Participants were home-dwelling patients 70 years or older, using at least 7 medications regularly, and having their medications administered by the home nursing service. Patients in the control group received usual care. Randomization occurred at the FP level. A modified intent-to-treat analysis was used.

INTERVENTION

The intervention consisted of 3 main parts: (1) clinical geriatric assessment of the patients combined with a thorough review of their medications; (2) a meeting between the geriatrician and the FP; and (3) clinical follow-up.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was health-related quality of life as assessed by the 15D instrument (score range, 0-1; higher scores indicate better quality of life, with a minimum clinically important change of ±0.015) at week 16. Secondary outcomes included changes in medication appropriateness, physical and cognitive functioning, use of health services, and mortality.

RESULTS

Among 174 patients (mean [SD] age, 83.3 [7.3] years; 67.8% women; 87 randomized to the intervention group and 87 randomized to the control [usual care] group) in 70 FP clusters (36 intervention and 34 control), 158 (90.8%) completed the trial. The mean (SD) 15D instrument score at baseline was 0.708 (0.121) in the intervention group and 0.714 (0.113) in the control group. At week 16, the mean (SD) 15D instrument score was 0.698 (0.164) in the intervention group and 0.655 (0.184) in the control group, with an estimated between-group difference of 0.045 (95% CI, 0.004-0.086; P = .03). Several secondary outcomes were also in favor of the intervention. There were more drug withdrawals, reduced dosages, and new drug regimens started in the intervention group.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study's findings indicate that, among older patients exposed to polypharmacy, clinical geriatric assessments and collaborative medication reviews carried out by a geriatrician in cooperation with the patient's FP can result in positive effects on health-related quality of life.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02379455.

Assessment of potentially inappropriate medications using the EU (7)-PIM list and the Swedish quality indicators

Background Several tools to evaluate the appropriateness of prescriptions have been developed over the years. Objective To compare the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) among elderly, using the European Union (EU) (7)-PIM list and the Swedish quality indicators. Secondary objectives were to investigate factors associated with the use of PIMs using the two tools. Setting Medical ward in a hospital in Northern Sweden. Methods Medical records for patients aged ≥ 65 years admitted to the medical ward were reviewed by clinical pharmacists from September to November 2015 and from February to April 2016. PIMs were identified through the abovementioned identification tools. Main outcome measure Prevalence of PIMs. Results Of 93 patients, 18.3% had one PIM according to the Swedish quality indicators. The most common PIM class was non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and diclofenac was one of the most commonly prescribed PIMs. According to the EU (7)-PIM list, 45.2% of the study population was prescribed one or more PIMs. The most common PIM class was hypnotic and sedative drugs, and the most frequently prescribed PIM was apixaban. No significant associations between PIMs and different factors were found using either identification tool. Conclusion The prevalence of PIMs was relatively low in the study sample according to the Swedish guidelines but high according to the EU (7)-PIM list. Different evaluation tools might give inconclusive results, but it is still important to continuously evaluate the need for PIMs in older patients in order to improve drug treatment and to decrease the risk of adverse drug reactions.

Reducing Potentially Inappropriate Medications in Older Adults: A Way Forward

La réduction des médicaments potentiellement inappropriés (MPI) chez les personnes âgées est un enjeu important selon de nombreux cliniciens et chercheurs à travers le monde, car ces médicaments accroissent significativement la morbidité et la mortalité dans la population plus âgée. La prévalence des MPI est un problème répandu malgré l’existence de plusieurs critères explicites et implicites de réduction des MPI chez les personnes âgées, les plus courants étant les critères de Beers, les critères STOPP/START et plusieurs critères nationaux spécifiques. Cette revue non systématique visait à examiner les critères de référence pour la réduction des MPI et à clarifier le rôle de certaines mesures, dont la déprescription, pour optimiser la prescription des médicaments chez les personnes âgées. Des recherches par mots-clés et termes MeSH ont été menées dans des bases de données électroniques. Les nombreux critères disponibles ont chacun leurs avantages et inconvénients. La déprescription, qui vise à réduire l’utilisation des MPI, a considérablement gagné en importance dans les initiatives associées à l’amélioration des pratiques de prescription. La déprescription est une approche méthodique qui implique l’arrêt graduel, éclairé et individualisé des médicaments inappropriés, avec un suivi rigoureux des patients pour assurer la détection d’événements indésirables ou de symptômes de rebond. Une approche combinée centrée sur le patient et le soignant favorise la collaboration entre les prescripteurs et les pharmaciens afin de réduire le nombre de MPI chez les personnes âgées.

Explicit criteria as clinical tools to minimize inappropriate medication use and its consequences

Polypharmacy and prescribing of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are the key elements of inappropriate medication use (IMU) in older multimorbid people. IMU is associated with a range of negative healthcare consequences including adverse drug events and unplanned hospitalizations. Furthermore, prescribing guidelines are commonly derived from randomized controlled clinical trials which have specifically excluded older adults with multimorbidity. Consequently, indiscriminate application of single disease pharmacotherapy guidelines to older multimorbid patients can lead to increased risk of drug-drug interactions, drug-disease interactions and poor drug adherence. Both polypharmacy and PIMs are highly prevalent in older people and strategies to improve the quality and safety of prescribing, largely through avoidance of IMU, are needed. In the last 30 years, numerous explicit PIM criteria-based tools have been developed to assist physicians with medication management in clinically complex multimorbid older people. Very few of these PIM criteria sets have been tested as an intervention compared with standard pharmaceutical care in well-designed clinical trials. In this review, we describe the most widely used sets of explicit PIM criteria to address inappropriate polypharmacy with particular focus on STOPP/START criteria and FORTA criteria which have been associated with positive patient-related outcomes when used as interventions in recent randomized controlled trials.

Medication Appropriateness in Vulnerable Older Adults: Healthy Skepticism of Appropriate Polypharmacy

Older adults are prescribed a growing number of medications. Polypharmacy, commonly considered the receipt of five or more medications, is associated with a range of adverse outcomes. There is a debate about the reason(s) why. On one side is the assertion that older persons are being prescribed too many medications, with the number of medications increasing the risk of adverse events. On the other side is the observation that polypharmacy is associated both with overprescribing of inappropriate medications and underprescribing of appropriate medications. This leads to the concept of "inappropriate" vs "appropriate" polypharmacy, with the latter resulting from the prescription of many correct medications to persons with multiple chronic conditions. Few studies have examined the health outcomes associated with adding and/or removing medications to address this debate directly. The criteria used to identify underutilized medications are based on results of randomized controlled trials that may not be generalizable to older adults. Several randomized controlled trials and many more observational studies provide evidence that these criteria overestimate medication benefits and underestimate harms. In addition, evidence suggests that the marginal effects of medications added to an already complex regimen differ from their effects when considered individually. Although in selected circumstances adding medications results in benefit to patients, patients with multimorbidity and frailty/disability have susceptibilities that can decrease the likelihood of medication benefit and increase the likelihood of harms. The identification of appropriate polypharmacy requires more robust criteria to evaluate the net effects of complex medication regimens.

A systematic review and novel classification of listing tools to improve medication in older people

PURPOSE

Suboptimal drugs therapy is a threat to older people, and listing tools providing guidance are developed to address this problem.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to identify and analyze such tools published until February 2018. A novel categorization was developed to separate patient-in-focus listing approaches (PILA) providing disease-related positive and negative guidance from drug-oriented, mostly negative listing approaches (DOLA, DOLA+: with disease specification).

RESULTS

In total, 76 tools were identified; only 9 were classified as PILA, 26 as DOLA, and 38 as DOLA+. Three DOLA(+) only address dementia. Most tools were developed in Europe or the USA and address community-dwellers. Thirty-two utilized a Delphi process, and only 10 provide a scoring system. Twenty tools utilize a questionnaire but no structured guidance or answers. Importantly, only 12 interventional clinical trials were identified reporting not only medication quality measures, but also clinical endpoints (e.g. falls, adverse drug reactions, hospitalization). For PILA, 4 trials showed positive, one negative clinical effects of a controlled intervention, for DOLA(+) 1 was positive, 7 negative (Fisher's exact test p < 0.05).

DISCUSSION

An abundance of listing tools has been created. DOLAs that may be applied without intricate patient knowledge prevail over PILAs by sevenfold; unfortunately their clinical validation seems to be far less successful than that of patient-initiated approaches.

CONCLUSION

Drug therapy in older people has to be tailored to their individual, very divergent needs; tools requiring detailed medical knowledge about the patient as the starting point for medication optimization provide the best support.