Deprescribing Medications for Chronic Diseases Management in Primary Care Settings: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Toward Multidisciplinary Tools for Complex Clinical Psychopharmacology Cases: A Qualitative Study with French Healthcare Professionals

Purpose

Psychopharmacology prescriptions are complex, partly due to the complexity of the relationship between diagnosis and its etiology, as well as the iatrogenic impact on symptomatology. Many multidisciplinary tools exist to optimize their management and improve evidence-based practice. However, their multidisciplinary integration seems to be a challenge. This study aimed to collect information on barriers and facilitators perceived by hospital health professionals regarding the use of multidisciplinary tools to address complex situations in psychopharmacology.

Research Design and Methods

A mixed-methods research approach using semi-structured interviews was conducted with physicians and pharmacists from 11 hospital institutions. An interview guide developed from the COM-B model (Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation - Behavior) was used to identify barriers and facilitators to the use of multidisciplinary tools. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify emerging themes and mapped to the COM-B model.

Results

28 professionals were interviewed. Identified barriers were: lack of knowledge and time to address complex situations, incomplete medical records, lack of easily accessible multidisciplinary tools, insufficient levels of evidence in psychopharmacology. Identified facilitators were: continuing education, communication and networking among professionals, implementation of adapted and shared resources, deprescribing, awareness of medication-induced iatrogenesis, accessibility of tools for all populations.

Conclusion

Identified barriers and facilitators in the use of multidisciplinary tools for complex situations in psychopharmacology helped to model factors that enable behavior change. Answers need to be provided to help professionals ensure and optimize psychopharmacological therapies.

An integrative systematic review of nurses' involvement in medication deprescription in long-term healthcare settings for older people

Background

Deprescription of medications for older people in long-term care settings is crucial to enhance medication safety by reducing polypharmacy and minimizing related adverse events. Nurses as the member of the multidisciplinary healthcare team can support deprescription initiatives, but there is a gap in comprehensive knowledge about their roles.

Objectives

To investigate the role and contribution of nurses in deprescribing medications within the multidisciplinary pharmaceutical care context of long-term healthcare for older people.

Design

A systematic review utilizing an integrative approach was performed.

Methods

Multiple databases were searched, including PubMed (covering MEDLINE), Scopus, CINAHL, ProQuest and Embase, focusing on studies published in English from 2014 to 2024. The preliminary search yielded 4872 studies, which were then refined to 32 qualitative and quantitative studies chosen for data analysis and narrative synthesis. Thematic comparisons and analysis led to the creation of meaningful categories integrating the studies' findings to meet the review's objective.

Results

The review findings were classified into categories: 'necessity and benefits of deprescribing', 'multidisciplinary collaboration for deprescribing', 'nurse role in deprescribing', 'identified challenges to deprescribing', 'involvement of older people and families in deprescribing'. They illustrated and exemplified various aspects of nurses' roles and contributions in deprescription initiatives within the multidisciplinary pharmaceutical care team, such as support for reducing doses, discontinuing medications or transitioning to safer alternatives, as well as factors influencing this process.

Conclusion

The main dimensions of nurses' roles and contributions in deprescription initiatives encompass monitoring, communicating and educating. Challenges to nurses' active participation in deprescribing, such as the need for increased knowledge, confidence and inclusion in team discussions, should be addressed through education, training and changing attitudes. These steps are essential for improving the safety of medication deprescribing in long-term care settings.

Trial registration

The review was registered under PROSPERO ID: CRD42023486484, and can be accessed at crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=486484.

[Strategies for the prevention and non-pharmacological treatment of diabetes. Models of care]

Diabetes is a highly prevalent, chronic disease that over time generates potentially serious complications. In the treatment of diabetes, the use of drugs that have shown significant benefits is important, but, in addition, the use of non-pharmacological interventions is essential, which constitute an efficient and effective way to reduce the appearance of diabetes itself and the complications of the disease. These interventions, which are described here, include health education, aimed at incorporating a healthier lifestyle, dietary modifications, increased physical activity or psychological support. Finally, the characteristics that a care system for people with diabetes must meet to achieve the established objectives are discussed.

Factors influencing central nervous system medication deprescribing and behavior change in hospitalized older adults

BACKGROUND

Central nervous system (CNS) medications are linked to higher morbidity and mortality in older adults. Hospitalization allows for deprescribing opportunities. This qualitative study investigates clinician and patient perspectives on CNS medication deprescribing during hospitalization using a behavioral change framework, aiming to inform interventions and identify recommendations to enhance hospital deprescribing processes.

METHODS

This qualitative study focused on hospitalists, primary care providers, pharmacists, and patients aged ≥60 years hospitalized on a general medicine service and prescribed ≥1 CNS medications. Using semi-structured interviews and focus groups, we aimed to evaluate patient medication knowledge, prior deprescribing experiences, and decision-making preferences, as well as provider processes and tools for medication evaluation and deprescribing. Rapid qualitative analysis applying the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Behavior (COM-B) framework revealed themes influencing deprescribing behavior in patients and providers.

RESULTS

A total of 52 participants (20 patients and 32 providers) identified facilitators and barriers across deprescribing steps and generated recommended strategies to address them. Clinicians and patients highlighted the opportunity for CNS medication deprescribing during hospitalizations, facilitated by multidisciplinary teams enhancing clinicians' capability to make medication changes. Both groups also stressed the importance of intensive patient engagement, education, and monitoring during hospitalizations, acknowledging challenges in timing and extent of deprescribing, with some patients preferring decisions deferred to outpatient clinicians. Hospitalist and pharmacist recommendations centered on early pharmacist involvement for medication reconciliation, expanding pharmacy consultation and clinician education on deprescribing, whereas patients recommended enhancing shared decision-making through patient education on medication adverse effects, tapering plans, and alternatives. Hospitalists and PCPs also emphasized standardized discharge instructions and transitional care calls to improve medication review and feedback during care transitions.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians and patients highlighted the potential advantages of hospital interventions for CNS medication deprescribing, emphasizing the necessity of addressing communication, education, and coordination challenges between inpatient and outpatient settings.

Prevalence of key potentially inappropriate drugs use in pediatrics: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Appropriate drug prescribing in the pediatric population is challenging, given this age group's unique pharmacokinetics. This has inevitably led to a high incidence of adverse drug reactions in this population. To address this issue, the Pediatric Pharmacy Association (PPA) compiled a list of 67 drugs that are inappropriately used in the pediatric population called the Key Potentially Inappropriate Drugs "KIDs list".

AIM

To estimate the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) use in pediatric wards based on the KIDs list criteria.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was conducted and included pediatric patients who were admitted to five pediatric wards during 3 years (2019-2021). The drugs in the KIDs list were matched to the hospital formulary and 11 matched drugs were included in the study. For each individual drug, the patient's electronic file was reviewed to determine the prescription appropriateness according to the KIDs list criteria.

RESULTS

Among 3,166 pediatric patients admitted to pediatric wards, a total of 415 patients received a PIM listed in the KIDs list. The mean age was 8.6 (± 4.9) years old, and 60.0% (n = 251/415) were males. The overall prevalence of PIM use was 13.0% (n = 415/3166). Among the prescribed PIM, metoclopramide was the most commonly prescribed PIM 42.8% (n = 178/415), followed by tramadol 37.6% (n = 156/415).

CONCLUSION

Given the high prevalence of inappropriate medication use in the pediatric wards, future research on strategies and interventions should be recommended to limit the use of PIMs and provide safer alternatives for the pediatric population.

Deprescribing: An umbrella review

This umbrella review examined systematic reviews of deprescribing studies by characteristics of intervention, population, medicine, and setting. Clinical and humanistic outcomes, barriers and facilitators, and tools for deprescribing are presented. The Medline database was used. The search was limited to systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in English up to April 2022. Reviews reporting deprescribing were included, while those where depre-scribing was not planned and supervised by a healthcare professional were excluded. A total of 94 systematic reviews (23 meta--analyses) were included. Most explored clinical or humanistic outcomes (70/94, 74 %); less explored attitudes, facilitators, or barriers to deprescribing (17/94, 18 %); few focused on tools (8/94, 8.5 %). Reviews assessing clinical or humanistic outcomes were divided into two groups: reviews with deprescribing intervention trials (39/70, 56 %; 16 reviewing specific deprescribing interventions and 23 broad medication optimisation interventions), and reviews with medication cessation trials (31/70, 44 %). Deprescribing was feasible and resulted in a reduction of inappropriate medications in reviews with deprescribing intervention trials. Complex broad medication optimisation interventions were shown to reduce hospitalisation, falls, and mortality rates. In reviews of medication cessation trials, a higher frequency of adverse drug withdrawal events underscores the importance of prioritizing patient safety and exercising caution when stopping medicines, particularly in patients with clear and appropriate indications.

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.

Implementation considerations of deprescribing interventions: A scoping review

Over half of older adults experience polypharmacy, including medications that may be inappropriate or unnecessary. Deprescribing, which is the process of discontinuing or reducing inappropriate and/or unnecessary medications, is an effective way to reduce polypharmacy. This review summarizes (1) the process of deprescribing and conceptual models and tools that have been developed to facilitate deprescribing, (2) barriers, enablers, and factors associated with deprescribing, and (3) characteristics of deprescribing interventions in completed trials, as well as (4) implementation considerations for deprescribing in routine practice. In conceptual models of deprescribing, multilevel factors of the patient, clinician, and health-care system are all related to the efficacy of deprescribing. Numerous tools have been developed for clinicians to facilitate deprescribing, yet most require substantial time and, thus, may be difficult to implement during routine health-care encounters. Multiple deprescribing interventions have been evaluated, which mostly include one or more of the following components: patient education, medication review, identification of deprescribing targets, and patient and/or provider communication about high-risk medications. Yet, there has been limited consideration of implementation factors in prior deprescribing interventions, especially with regard to the personnel and resources in existing health-care systems and the feasibility of incorporating components of deprescribing interventions into the routine care processes of clinicians. Future trials require a more balanced consideration of both effectiveness and implementation when designing deprescribing interventions.

Medication review and deprescribing in different healthcare settings: a position statement from an Italian scientific consortium

Recent medical advancements have increased life expectancy, leading to a surge in patients affected by multiple chronic diseases and consequent polypharmacy, especially among older adults. This scenario increases the risk of drug interactions and adverse drug reactions, highlighting the need for medication review and deprescribing to reduce inappropriate medications and optimize therapeutic regimens, with the ultimate goal to improving patients' health and quality of life. This position statement from the Italian Scientific Consortium on medication review and deprescribing aims to describe key elements, strategies, tools, timing, and healthcare professionals to be involved, for the implementation of medication review and deprescribing in different healthcare settings (i.e., primary care, hospital, long-term care facilities, and palliative care). Challenges and potential solutions for the implementation of medication review and deprescribing are also discussed.

Unlocking Deprescribing Potential in Nursing Homes: Insights from a Focus Group Study with Healthcare Professionals

BACKGROUND

The nursing home population is characterized by multimorbidity and disabilities, which often result in extensive prescription of medication and subsequent polypharmacy. Deprescribing, a planned and supervised process of dose reduction or total cessation of medication, is a solution to combat this.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify barriers and enablers of deprescribing as experienced by nursing home physicians (NHPs) and collaborating pharmacists in the specific nursing home setting.

METHODS

This qualitative study utilized a semi-structured interview format with two focus groups consisting of a mix of NHPs and pharmacists. Directed content analysis was performed based on the Theoretical Domains Framework, a validated framework for understanding determinants of behavior change among health care professionals.

RESULTS

Sixteen health care professionals participated in two focus groups, including 13 NHPs and three pharmacists. The participating NHPs and pharmacists believed that deprescribing is a valuable process with enablers, such as multidisciplinary collaboration, good communication with patients and family, and involvement of the nursing staff. NHPs and pharmacists view deprescribing as a core task and feel assured in their ability to carry it out successfully. However, they also noted barriers: deprescribing is time-consuming; communication with residents, their relatives or medical specialists is difficult; and electronic patient systems often do not adequately support it.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides insight into the various barriers and enablers faced by NHPs and pharmacists when deprescribing in nursing homes. Specific for this population, deprescribing barriers focus on communication (with residents and their relatives, and also with medical specialists) and resources, while knowledge and expertise are mentioned as enablers.

What is the quantity, quality and type of systematic review evidence available to inform the optimal prescribing of statins and antihypertensives? A systematic umbrella review and evidence and gap map

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to map the systematic review evidence available to inform the optimal prescribing of statins and antihypertensive medication.

DESIGN

Systematic umbrella review and evidence and gap map (EGM).

DATA SOURCES

Eight bibliographic databases (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL, EMBASE, Health Management Information Consortium, MEDLINE ALL, PsycINFO, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science and Science Citation Index) were searched from 2010 to 11 August 2020. Update searches conducted in MEDLINE ALL 2 August 2022. We searched relevant websites and conducted backwards citation chasing.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

We sought systematic reviews of quantitative or qualitative research where adults 16 years+ were currently receiving, or being considered for, a prescription of statin or antihypertensive medication. Eligibility criteria were applied to the title and abstract and full text of each article independently by two reviewers.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Quality appraisal was completed by one reviewer and checked by a second. Review characteristics were tabulated and incorporated into an EGM based on a patient care pathway. Patients with lived experience provided feedback on our research questions and EGM.

RESULTS

Eighty reviews were included within the EGM. The highest quantity of evidence focused on evaluating interventions to promote patient adherence to antihypertensive medication. Key gaps included a lack of reviews synthesising evidence on experiences of specific interventions to promote patient adherence or improve prescribing practice. The evidence was predominantly of low quality, limiting confidence in the findings from individual reviews.

CONCLUSIONS

This EGM provides an interactive, accessible format for policy developers, service commissioners and clinicians to view the systematic review evidence available relevant to optimising the prescribing of statin and antihypertensive medication. To address the paucity of high-quality research, future reviews should be conducted and reported according to existing guidelines and address the evidence gaps identified above.

Polypharmacy and Deprescribing in Older Adults

Older adults commonly end up on many medications. Deprescribing is an important part of individualizing care for older adults. It is an opportunity to discuss treatment options and revisit medications that may not have been reassessed in many years. A large evidence base exists in the field, suggesting that deprescribing is feasible and safe, though questions remain about the potential clinical benefits. Deprescribing research faces a myriad of challenges, such as identifying and employing the optimal outcome measures. Further, there is uncertainty about which deprescribing approaches are likely to be most effective and in what contexts. Evidence on barriers and facilitators to deprescribing has underscored how deprescribing in routine clinical practice can be complex and challenging. Thus, finding practical, sustainable ways to implement deprescribing is a priority for future research in the field.

Drug-Related Problems and Sick Day Management Considerations for Medications that Contribute to the Risk of Acute Kidney Injury

BACKGROUND

Medication use during acute illness increases the risk of experiencing drug related problems (DRPs), including acute kidney injuries. It is recommended that potentially nephrotoxic medications are withheld during acute illness, including sulfonylureas, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, diuretics, metformin, angiotensin receptor blockers, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories and sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SADMANS). It is unknown if Australian pharmacists currently provide sick day medication management advice regarding SADMANS medications. Hence, we aimed to identify current DRPs and the recommendations made during residential medication management reviews (RMMRs), especially with SADMANS medications.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 408 RMMRs was conducted. DRPs and pharmacist recommendations were classified according to a modified DOCUMENT system. General practitioners' (GP) recommendations were also categorised.

RESULTS

Over 97% of residents experienced at least one DRP. Common problems for non-SADMANS medications were "toxicity or adverse drug reaction", "drug selection" and "over/underdosing" and those for SADMANS medications included "toxicity or adverse drug reaction", "monitoring" and "drug selection". GPs agreed with pharmacist recommendations approximately 40% of the time. No pharmacists provided sick day medication management advice for SADMANS medications.

CONCLUSION

DRPs remain highly prevalent in aged care facilities. Medication reviews effectively identify and resolve DRPs approximately 40% of the time, but do not currently minimise the risk associated with using SADMANS medications during sick days, which is a potential area of improvement.

Attitudes towards deprescribing in geriatric psychiatry: A survey among older psychiatric outpatients

Understanding the patient perspective is a significant part of the deprescribing process. This study aimed to explore the attitudes of older patients with psychiatric disorders towards deprescribing. A total of 72 of psychiatric outpatients (68% women; median age 76 years) completed the validated Danish version of the revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire. Patients used a median of eight medications (interquartile range 6-12), with 88%, 49% and 24% using antidepressants, antipsychotics and anxiolytics, respectively. Fifty-one percent of patients reported an intrinsic desire to stop one of their medications, while 92% would be willing to stop one on their physician's advice. Seventy-five percent of patients would be worried about missing out on future benefits following deprescribing and 37% had previous bad deprescribing experiences. Use of ≥8 regular medications was associated with more concerns about stopping medication and greater perceived burden of using medication, while use of antipsychotics was not associated with any differences in rPATD factor scores. It is crucial for health care professionals to be aware of patients' specific concerns and past experiences to promote a patient-centred deprescribing approach that takes into account the needs and preferences of older patients with psychiatric disorders.

Evaluating the Safety of an Educational Deprescribing Intervention: Lessons from the Optimize Trial

BACKGROUND

Patients, family members, and clinicians express concerns about potential adverse drug withdrawal events (ADWEs) following medication discontinuation or fears of upsetting a stable medical equilibrium as key barriers to deprescribing. Currently, there are limited methods to pragmatically assess the safety of deprescribing and ascertain ADWEs. We report the methods and results of safety monitoring for the OPTIMIZE trial of deprescribing education for patients, family members, and clinicians.

METHODS

This was a pragmatic cluster randomized trial with multivariable Poisson regression comparing outcome rates between study arms. We conducted clinical record review and adjudication of sampled records to assess potential causal relationships between medication discontinuation and outcomes. This study included adults aged 65+ with dementia or mild cognitive impairment, one or more additional chronic conditions, and prescribed 5+ chronic medications. The intervention included an educational brochure on deprescribing that was mailed to patients prior to primary care visits, a clinician notification about individual brochure mailings, and an educational tip sheets was provided monthly to primary care clinicians. The outcomes of the safety monitoring were rates of hospitalizations and mortality during the 4 months following brochure mailings and results of record review and adjudication. The adjudication process was conducted throughout the trial and included classifications: likely, possibly, and unlikely.

RESULTS

There was a total of 3012 (1433 intervention and 1579 control) participants. There were 420 total hospitalizations involving 269 (18.8%) people in the intervention versus 517 total hospitalizations involving 317 (20.1%) people in the control groups. Adjusted risk ratios comparing intervention to control groups were 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72, 1.16] for hospitalization and 1.19 (95% CI 0.67, 2.11) for mortality. Both groups had zero deaths "likely" attributed to a medication change prior to the event. A total of 3 out of 30 (10%) intervention group hospitalizations and 7 out of 35 (20%) control group hospitalizations were considered "likely" due to a medication change.

CONCLUSIONS

Population-based deprescribing education is safe in the older adult population with cognitive impairment in our study. Pragmatic methods for safety monitoring are needed to further inform deprescribing interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03984396. Registered on 13 June 2019.

Effectiveness of an Integrated Ambulatory Care Program in Health Care and Medication Use in Patients With Multimorbidity and Polypharmacy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Multimorbidity increases risks, such as polypharmacy, inappropriate prescription, and functional decline. It also increases medical care utilization by older adults, placing a burden on health care systems. This study evaluated the effectiveness of an integrated ambulatory care program for health care and medication use in patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective clinical review of adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy who attended an integrated ambulatory care program at a 1193-bed university hospital between July 1 and September 30, 2019. This program involves multidisciplinary teamwork, comprehensive assessments, medication reviews, and case management. Outcomes, including the frequency of outpatient visits, emergency department visits, hospitalizations, chronic prescription medications, potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), health care costs, and total medical expenditure, were compared before and after the program.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants (n = 134) at baseline was 74.22 ± 9.75 years. The mean number of chronic diagnoses was 9.45 ± 3.38. Participants included 72 (53.7%) women. At the 1-year follow-up, participants showed a significant decrease in the annual frequency of outpatient visits (19.78 ± 9.98 to 13.90 ± 10.22, P < .001), emergency department visits (1.04 ± 1.70 to 0.73 ± 1.40, P = .029), and chronic disease medications (10.71 ± 3.96 to 9.57 ± 3.67, P < .001) across all age groups. There was also a reduction in the annual number of PIMs (from 1.31 ± 1.01 to 1.12 ± 0.93, P = .002) among patients aged 65 years. However, no effects were observed on annual hospitalization, duration of hospital stay, or total health care expenditure, possibly due to the high disease-related treatment cost for certain participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Expanding integrated ambulatory care programs in Taiwan may help patients with multimorbidity reduce their use of outpatient and emergency services, chronic prescriptions, and PIMs.

Proton pump inhibitor use: systematic review of global trends and practices

PURPOSE

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) reduce acid secretion in the stomach and rank as one of the most widely used acid-suppressing medicines globally. While PPIs are safe in the short-term, emerging evidence shows risks associated with long-term use. Current evidence on global PPI use is scarce. This systematic review aims to evaluate global PPI use in the general population.

METHODS

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts were systematically searched from inception to 31 March 2023 to identify observational studies on oral PPI use among individuals aged ≥ 18 years. PPI use was classified by demographics and medication factors (dose, duration, and PPI types). The absolute numbers of PPI users for each subcategory were summed and expressed as a percentage.

RESULTS

The search identified data from 28 million PPI users in 23 countries from 65 articles. This review indicated that nearly one-quarter of adults use a PPI. Of those using PPIs, 63% were less than 65 years. 56% of PPI users were female, and "White" ethnicities accounted for 75% of users. Nearly two-thirds of users were on high doses (≥ defined daily dose (DDD)), 25% of users continued PPIs for > 1 year, and 28% of these continued for > 3 years.

CONCLUSION

Given the widespread use PPIs and increasing concern regarding long-term use, this review provides a catalyst to support more rational use, particularly with unnecessary prolonged continuation. Clinicians should review PPI prescriptions regularly and deprescribe when there is no appropriate ongoing indication or evidence of benefit to reduce health harm and treatment cost.

Diuretics, SGLT2 inhibitors and falls in older heart failure patients: to prescribe or to deprescribe? A clinical review

PURPOSE

Both heart failure and its treatment with diuretics or SGLT2 inhibitors increase fall risk in older adults. Therefore, decisions to continue or deprescribe diuretics or SGLT2 inhibitors in older heart failure patients who have fallen are generally highly complex and challenging for clinicians. However, a comprehensive overview of information required for rationale and safe decision-making is lacking. The aim of this clinical review was to assist clinicians in safe (de)prescribing of these drug classes in older heart failure patients.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched and summarized published literature and international guidelines on the efficacy, fall-related safety issues, and deprescribing of the commonly prescribed diuretics and SGLT2 inhibitors in older adults.

RESULTS

Both diuretics and SGLT2 inhibitors potentially cause various fall-related adverse effects. Their fall-related side effect profiles partly overlap (e.g., tendency to cause hypotension), but there are also important differences; based on the currently available evidence of this relatively new drug class, SGLT2 inhibitors seem to have a favorable fall-related adverse effect profile compared to diuretics (e.g., low/absent tendency to cause hyperglycemia or electrolyte abnormalities, low risk of worsening chronic kidney disease). In addition, SGLT2 inhibitors have potential beneficial effects (e.g., disease-modifying effects in heart failure, renoprotective effects), whereas diuretic effects are merely symptomatic.

CONCLUSION

(De)prescribing diuretics and SGLT2 inhibitors in older heart failure patients who have fallen is often highly challenging, but this clinical review paper assists clinicians in individualized and patient-centered rational clinical decision-making: we provide a summary of available literature on efficacy and (subclass-specific) safety profiles of diuretics and SGLT2 inhibitors, and practical guidance on safe (de)prescribing of these drugs (e.g. a clinical decision tree for deprescribing diuretics in older adults who have fallen).

Harm and Medication-Type Impact Agreement with Hypothetical Deprescribing Recommendations: a Vignette-Based Experiment with Older Adults Across Four Countries

BACKGROUND

Little is known about what factors are important to older adults when deciding whether to agree with a recommendation to deprescribe.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the extent to which medication type and rationale for potential discontinuation influence older adults' acceptance of deprescribing.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional 2 (drug: lansoprazole - treat indigestion; simvastatin - prevent cardiovascular disease) by 3 (deprescribing rationale: lack of benefit; potential for harm; both) experimental design.

PARTICIPANTS

Online panelists aged ≥65 years from Australia, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States INTERVENTIONS: Participants were presented with a hypothetical patient experiencing polypharmacy whose PCP discussed stopping a medication. We randomized participants to receive one of six vignettes.

MAIN MEASURES

We measured agreement with deprescribing (6-point Likert scale, "Strongly disagree (1)" and "Strongly agree (6)") for the hypothetical patient as the primary outcome. We also measured participants' personality traits, perceptions of risk and uncertainty, and attitudes towards polypharmacy and deprescribing.

KEY RESULTS

Among 5311 participants (93.3% completion rate), the mean (M) agreement with deprescribing for the hypothetical patient was 4.71 (95% confidence interval (CI): 4.67, 4.75). Participants reported higher agreement with stopping lansoprazole (n=2656) (M=4.90, 95% CI: 4.85, 4.95) compared to simvastatin (n=2655) (M=4.53, 95% CI: 4.47, 4.58), P<.001. Participants who received the combination rationale (n=1786) reported higher agreement with deprescribing (M=4.83, 95% CI: 4.76, 4.89) compared to those who received the rationales on lack of benefit (n=1755) (M=4.66, 95% CI: 4.60, 4.73) or potential for harm (n=1770) (M=4.65, 95% CI 4.58, 4.72). In adjusted regression analyses (n=5062), participants with a higher desire to engage in health promotion behaviors (b=0.08, 95% CI 0.02, 0.13) or need for certainty (b=0.12, 95% CI 0.04, 0.20) reported higher agreement with deprescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

Older adults across four countries were accepting of deprescribing in the setting of polypharmacy. The medication type and rationale for discontinuation were important factors in the decision-making process.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04676282, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04676282?term=vordenberg&draw=2&rank=1.

Reducing inappropriate polypharmacy for older patients at specialist outpatient clinics: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Polypharmacy is associated with negative clinical consequences. The efficacy of deprescribing interventions within medical specialist outpatient clinics remains unclear. Here, we reviewed the research on the effectiveness of deprescribing interventions implemented within specialist outpatient clinics for patients ≥ 60 years.

METHODS

Systematic searches of key databases were undertaken for studies published between January 1990 and October 2021. The diverse nature of the study designs made it unsuitable for pooling for meta-analysis, thus, a narrative review was conducted and presented in both text and tabular formats. The primary outcome for review was that intervention resulted in a change in medication load (either total number of medications or appropriateness of medication). Secondary outcomes were the maintenance of deprescription and clinical benefits. Methodological quality of the publications was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tools.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies with a total of 10,914 participants were included for review. These included geriatric outpatient clinics, oncology/hematology clinics, hemodialysis clinics, and designated polypharmacy/multimorbidity clinics. Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported statistically significant reductions in medication load with intervention; however, all studies had a high risk of bias. The inclusion of a pharmacist in outpatient clinics aims to increase deprescribing, however, the current evidence is mainly restricted to prospective and pilot studies. The data on secondary outcomes were very limited and highly variable.

CONCLUSIONS

Specialist outpatient clinics may provide valuable settings for implementing deprescribing interventions. The addition of a multidisciplinary team including a pharmacist and the use of validated medication assessment tools appear to be enablers. Further research is warranted.

Differences in Factors Influencing Deprescribing between Primary Care Providers: Cross-Sectional Study

Deprescribing is a notable approach to improve medication management, but few healthcare systems recognize it. To introduce a new practice, it is important to examine the factors influencing the provision of a new or elaborate cognitive service within the desired setting. This study explores the perceived barriers and facilitators of deprescribing by primary healthcare providers, and identifies the factors associated with a willingness to suggest deprescribing. A cross-sectional survey was conducted (in Croatia, between October 2021 and January 2022) using a validated comprehensive healthcare providers' opinions, preferences, and attitudes towards deprescribing (CHOPPED) questionnaire. A total of 419 pharmacists and 124 physicians participated. Participants showed a high willingness to deprescribe, with significantly higher scores in physicians than in pharmacists (5.00 (interquartile range-IQR 5-5) vs. 4.00 (IQR 4-5), p < 0.001). Pharmacists had significantly higher scores in seven out of ten factors (knowledge, awareness, collaboration facilitators, competencies facilitators, healthcare system facilitators, collaboration barriers, competencies barriers) while in the remaining three factors (patient facilitators, patient and healthcare system barriers) there was no difference in scores. The strongest positive correlation with willingness to suggest deprescribing was found with the collaboration and healthcare system facilitators factors for pharmacists (G = 0.331, p < 0.001, and G = 0.309, p < 0.001, respectively), and with knowledge, awareness, and patient facilitators factors for physicians (G = 0.446, p = 0.001; G = 0.771, p < 0.001; and G = 0.259, p = 0.043, respectively). Primary healthcare providers are willing to suggest deprescribing but face different barriers and facilitators. For pharmacists, the most important facilitators were extrinsic, while for physicians they were more intrinsic and patient related. The stated results provide target areas which one could focus upon to help to engage healthcare providers in deprescribing.

"There Is Method to This Madness" A Qualitative Investigation of Home Medication Management by Older Adults

OBJECTIVES

This paper explores (1) the systems and processes older adults use to manage medications at home, and (2) the well-being goals of personal interest that motivate them.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews were conducted in the homes of 12 older adults in a small city in the Midwest United States. Interviews were analyzed using inductive template analysis.

RESULTS

The average age of older adults in this study was 74.2 years (SD = 10.5), 66.7% were women. The most prominent home medication management tools used were pill boxes, containers and vials, and medication lists. Routines were often aligned with activities of daily living such as teeth brushing and eating. Their medication management work occurred in contexts of other household members and budget constraints. Routines and practices were sometimes idiosyncratic adaptations and supported goals of maintaining control and decreasing vulnerability.

CONCLUSION

In developing routines for home medication management, older adults developed systems and deliberate processes to make sense of their medication experiences in the context of their home environment and based on available resources.

How "age-friendly" are deprescribing interventions? A scoping review of deprescribing trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess how age-friendly deprescribing trials are regarding intervention design and outcome assessment. Reduced use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) can be addressed by deprescribing-a systematic process of discontinuing and/or reducing the use of PIMs. The 4Ms-"Medication", "Mentation", "Mobility", and "What Matters Most" to the person-can be used to guide assessment of age-friendliness of deprescribing trials.

DATA SOURCE

Published literature.

STUDY DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA EXTRACTION METHODS

The literature was identified using keywords related to deprescribing and polypharmacy in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, ProQuest, CINAHL, and Cochrane and snowballing. Study characteristics were extracted and evaluated for consideration of 4Ms.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Thirty-seven of the 564 trials identified met the review eligibility criteria. Intervention design: "Medication" was considered in the intervention design of all trials; "Mentation" was considered in eight trials; "Mobility" (n = 2) and "What Matters Most" (n = 6) were less often considered in the design of intervention. Most trials targeted providers without specifying how matters important to older adults and their families were aligned with deprescribing decisions.

OUTCOME ASSESSMENT

"Medication" was the most commonly assessed outcome (n = 33), followed by "Mobility" (n = 13) and "Mentation" (n = 10) outcomes, with no study examining "What Matters Most" outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

"Mentation" and "Mobility", and "What Matters Most" have been considered to varying degrees in deprescribing trials, limiting the potential of deprescribing evidence to contribute to improved clinical practice in building an age-friendly health care system.

Recommendations for outcome measurement for deprescribing intervention studies

Interpreting results from deprescribing interventions to generate actionable evidence is challenging owing to inconsistent and heterogeneous outcome definitions between studies. We sought to characterize deprescribing intervention outcomes and recommend approaches to measure outcomes for future studies. A scoping literature review focused on deprescribing interventions for polypharmacy and informed a series of expert panel discussions and recommendations. Twelve experts in deprescribing research, policy, and clinical practice interventions participating in the Measures Workgroup of the US Deprescribing Research Network sought to characterize deprescribing outcomes and recommend approaches to measure outcomes for future studies. The scoping review identified 125 papers reflecting 107 deprescribing studies. Common outcomes included medication discontinuation, medication appropriateness, and a broad range of clinical outcomes potentially resulting from medication reduction. Panel recommendations included clearly defining clinically meaningful medication outcomes (e.g., number of chronic medications, dose reductions), ensuring adequate sample size and follow-up time to capture clinical outcomes resulting from medication discontinuation (e.g., quality of life [QOL]), and selecting appropriate and feasible data sources. A new conceptual model illustrates how downstream clinical outcomes (e.g., reduction in falls) should be interpreted in the context of initial changes in medication measures (e.g., reduction in mean total medications). Areas needing further development include implementation outcomes specific to deprescribing interventions and measures of adverse drug withdrawal events. Generating evidence to guide deprescribing is essential to address patient, caregiver, and clinician concerns about the benefits and harms of medication discontinuation. This article provides recommendations and an initial conceptual framework for selecting and applying appropriate intervention outcomes to support deprescribing research.

Deprescribing Education vs Usual Care for Patients With Cognitive Impairment and Primary Care Clinicians: The OPTIMIZE Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trial

Background

Individuals with dementia or mild cognitive impairment frequently have multiple chronic conditions (defined as ≥2 chronic medical conditions) and take multiple medications, increasing their risk for adverse outcomes. Deprescribing (reducing or stopping medications for which potential harms outweigh potential benefits) may decrease their risk of adverse outcomes.

Objective

To examine the effectiveness of increasing patient and clinician awareness about the potential to deprescribe unnecessary or risky medications among patients with dementia or mild cognitive impairment.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This pragmatic, patient-centered, 12-month cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted from April 1, 2019, to March 31, 2020, at 18 primary care clinics in a not-for-profit integrated health care delivery system. The study included 3012 adults aged 65 years or older with dementia or mild cognitive impairment who had 1 or more additional chronic medical conditions and were taking 5 or more long-term medications.

Interventions

An educational brochure and a questionnaire on attitudes toward deprescribing were mailed to patients prior to a primary care visit, clinicians were notified about the mailing, and deprescribing tip sheets were distributed to clinicians at monthly clinic meetings.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The number of prescribed long-term medications and the percentage of individuals prescribed 1 or more potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis.

Results

This study comprised 1433 individuals (806 women [56.2%]; mean [SD] age, 80.1 [7.2] years) in 9 intervention clinics and 1579 individuals (874 women [55.4%]; mean [SD] age, 79.9 [7.5] years) in 9 control clinics who met the eligibility criteria. At baseline, both groups were prescribed a similar mean (SD) number of long-term medications (7.0 [2.1] in the intervention group and 7.0 [2.2] in the control group), and a similar proportion of individuals in both groups were taking 1 or more PIMs (437 of 1433 individuals [30.5%] in the intervention group and 467 of 1579 individuals [29.6%] in the control group). At 6 months, the adjusted mean number of long-term medications was similar in the intervention and control groups (6.4 [95% CI, 6.3-6.5] vs 6.5 [95% CI, 6.4-6.6]; P = .14). The estimated percentages of patients in the intervention and control groups taking 1 or more PIMs were similar (17.8% [95% CI, 15.4%-20.5%] vs 20.9% [95% CI, 18.4%-23.6%]; P = .08). In preplanned subgroup analyses, adjusted differences between the intervention and control groups were -0.16 (95% CI, -0.34 to 0.01) for individuals prescribed 7 or more long-term medications at baseline (n = 1434) and -0.03 (95% CI, -0.20 to 0.13) for those prescribed 5 to 6 medications (n = 1578) (P = .28 for interaction; P = .19 for subgroup interaction for PIMs).

Conclusions and Relevance

This large-scale educational deprescribing intervention for older adults with cognitive impairment taking 5 or more long-term medications and their primary care clinicians demonstrated small effect sizes and did not significantly reduce the number of long-term medications and PIMs. Such interventions should target older adults taking relatively more medications.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03984396.

Number-dependent association of potentially inappropriate medications with clinical outcomes and expenditures among community-dwelling older adults: a population-based cohort study

AIM

To investigate the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) prescribing and its number-dependent association (PIM=1, 2, ≥3) with all-cause hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, and medication expenditures in Beijing, China.

METHOD

A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted to analyze PIM prescribing in community-dwelling older adults aged ≥ 65 years within the Beijing Municipal Medical Insurance Database (data from July to September 2016). The prevalence of PIMs was estimated based on the 2015 Beers Criteria. Logistic models were utilized to investigate the associations between PIM use and all-cause hospitalizations and ED visits. Generalized linear models with the logic link and gamma distribution were used to analyze associations between PIM use and medication expenditures.

RESULTS

Among the 506,214 older adults, the prevalence of PIM was 38.07%. After adjusting for covariables, prescribing 2 and ≥3 PIMs was associated with increased risks of hospitalizations (PIM=2: OR 1.34, 95%CI: 1.22-1.47; PIM≥3: OR=1.47, 95%CI: 1.32-1.63) and ED visits (PIM=2: OR = 1.29, 95%CI 1.12-1.48; PIM≥3: OR=1.23, 95%CI: 1.04-1.44). Exposures of 2 and ≥3 PIMs were associated with higher medication expenditures for inpatient visits (PIM=2: incidence rate ratio IRR = 1.08, 95%CI 1.01-1.16; PIM≥3: IRR=1.18, 95%CI: 1.08-1.28). Vasodilators were the most frequent PIM prescribing group among patients who ended with hospitalizations or ED visits.

CONCLUSIONS

PIMs were prescribed at a high rate among community-dwelling older adults in Beijing. PIMs ≥2 were associated with increased risks of hospitalizations, ED visits, and increased inpatient medication expenditures. Effective interventions are needed to target unnecessary and inappropriate medications in older adults.

A multifactorial intervention to lower potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults in Argentina

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug reactions are a common cause of potentially avoidable harm, particularly in older adults.

AIMS

To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of a pilot multifactorial intervention to reduce potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in older adults.

METHODS

We conducted a phase 2, feasibility, open-label study in the ambulatory setting of an integrated healthcare network in Buenos Aires, Argentina. We recruited primary care physicians (PCPs) and measured PIM use in a sample of their patients (65 years or older). Educational workshops for PCPs were organized with the involvement of clinician champions. Practical deprescribing algorithms were designed based on Beers criteria. Automatic email alerts based on specific PIMs recorded in each patient's electronic health record were used as a reminder tool. PCPs were responsible for deprescribing decisions. We randomly sampled 879 patients taking PIMs from eight of the most commonly used drug classes at our institution and compared basal (6 months prior to the intervention) and final (12 months after) prevalence of PIM use using a test of proportions.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction (p < 0.05) in all drug classes evaluated. Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (basal prevalence 5.92%; final 1.59%); benzodiazepines (10.13%; 6.94%); histamine antagonists (7.74%; 3.07%); opioids (2.16%; 1.25%); tricyclic antidepressants (8.08%; 4.10%); muscle relaxants (7.74%; 3.41%), anti-hypertensives (3.53%; 1.82%) and oxybutynin (2.96%; 1.82%). The absolute reduction in the overall prevalence was 8.5 percentage points (relative reduction of 51.4%).

CONCLUSION

This multifactorial intervention is feasible and effective in reducing the use of potentially inappropriate medication in all drug classes evaluated.

Team approach to polypharmacy evaluation and reduction: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy in older adults can be associated with negative outcomes including falls, impaired cognition, reduced quality of life, and general and functional decline. It is not clear to what extent these are reversible if the number of medications is reduced. Primary care does not have a systematic approach for reducing inappropriate polypharmacy, and there are few, if any, approaches that account for the patient's priorities and preferences. The primary objective of this study is to test the effect of TAPER (Team Approach to Polypharmacy Evaluation and Reduction), a structured operationalized clinical pathway focused on reducing inappropriate polypharmacy. TAPER integrates evidence tools for identifying potentially inappropriate medications, tapering, and monitoring guidance and explicit elicitation of patient priorities and preferences. We aim to determine the effect of TAPER on the number of medications (primary outcome) and health-related outcomes associated with polypharmacy in older adults.

METHODS

We designed a multi-center randomized controlled trial, with the lead implementation site in Hamilton, Ontario. Older adults aged 70 years or older who are on five or more medications will be eligible to participate. A total of 360 participants will be recruited. Participants will be assigned to either the control or intervention arm. The intervention involves a comprehensive multidisciplinary medication review by pharmacists and physicians in partnership with patients. This review will be focused on reducing medication burden, with the assumption that this will reduce the risks and harms of polypharmacy. The control group is a wait list, and control patients will be given appointments for the TAPER intervention at a date after the final outcome assessment. All patients will be followed up and outcomes measured in both groups at baseline and 6 months.

DISCUSSION

Our trial is unique in its design in that it aims to introduce an operationalized structured clinical pathway aimed to reduce polypharmacy in a primary care setting while at the same time recording patient's goals and priorities for treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials.gov NCT02942927. First registered on October 24, 2016.

Deprescribing Statins and Proton Pump Inhibitors in Nursing Home Residents; a Pragmatic Exploratory Study

Introduction

Polypharmacy is common in the frail nursing home population and associated with an increased risk of adverse events, unplanned hospitalizations, and increased all-cause mortality. Deprescribing using a deprescribing algorithm might reduce unnecessary polypharmacy. This exploratory study was performed to determine the effect of this implicit deprescribing algorithm in deprescribing statins and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in nursing home residents.

Method

Multicenter, longitudinal, single-arm exploratory study. All participants received the same deprescribing intervention to identify and deprescribe potentially inappropriate statins and/or PPIs. Residents across 10 nursing homes in the Netherlands were included if they used a statin and/or PPI. Residents in hospices or short-stay wards were excluded. The intervention involved a deprescribing algorithm in which nursing home physicians identified and, if possible, deprescribed potentially inappropriate statins and/or PPIs.

Results

Sixty-seven residents participated in the study. At 3 months, deprescribing was successful in 52% of the residents. Six months after the intervention, all these residents still had their medication sustainably deprescribed.

Conclusion

Based on this study, deprescribing statins and PPIs using an implicit deprescribing algorithm is possible in a considerable number of nursing home residents.

A nursing mentoring programme on non-pharmacological interventions against BPSD: Effectiveness and use of antipsychotics-A retrospective, before-after study

Behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) are common and have significant implications for patients and caregivers. Non‐pharmacological interventions (NPI) have shown to be effective in the management of BPSD. However, the use of antipsychotics to treat BPSD remains ubiquitous. This retrospective, before–after study aimed to examine whether a nurse mentoring programme promoting NPI for BPSD management had a significant association with the use of antipsychotics in older adults with major neurocognitive disorders residing in different settings. Results obtained from the medical files of 134 older adults having benefitted from the mentoring programme demonstrate that this intervention significantly reduced BPSD. The effect on antipsychotics use was modest: a 10% reduction in the use of antipsychotics has been observed among patients for which the NPI were effective. However, the use of antipsychotics remained widespread despite the nursing recommendations of the mentoring team of the Center of Excellence on Aging in Quebec (CEVQ).

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DESIGN

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

PARTICIPANTS

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

APPROACH

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

KEY RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Clinical factors associated with increased length of stay and readmission in patients with medication-related hospital admissions: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug events (ADEs) remain a key contributor to hospitalisations, resulting in long hospital stays and readmissions. Information pertaining to the specific medications and clinical factors associated with these outcomes is limited. Hence, a better understanding of these factors and their relationship to ADEs is required.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate medications involved, clinical manifestations of ADE-related hospitalisations, and their association with length of stay and readmission.

METHODS

A retrospective medical record review of patients admitted to a major, tertiary referral hospital in NSW, Australia, from January 2019 to August 2020 was conducted. ADEs were identified using Australian Refined Diagnosis Related Group (AR-DRG) codes: X40, X61, X62 and X64. Medications were classified per the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification system and clinical symptoms were classified per the International Classification of Disease (ICD) 9-CM. Logistic regression was performed to assess the relationship between medication and presentation classes with length of stay (≥2 days vs <2 days) and readmission.

RESULTS

There were 125 patients who met inclusion criteria (median age = 64 [interquartile range, 45-75] years; 53.6% male). Anti-thrombotic agents, opioids, antidepressants, antipsychotics, insulins and NSAIDs were the most implicated pharmacological classes. Neurological medications and falls were associated with a length of stay ≥2 days (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48-10.33 and aOR 3.24, 95% CI 1.05-10.06, respectively). Neurological medications and neurological and cognitive disorders were associated with an increased likelihood of 90-day readmission (aOR 2.63, 95% CI 1.05-6.57 and aOR 3.20, 95% CI 1.17-8.75, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This study identified neurological medications as high-risk for increased length of stay and readmission in those hospitalised due to ADEs. This highlights the need for judicious prescribing and monitoring of these medications.

Deprescribing intervention activities mapped to guiding principles for use in general practice: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To identify and characterise activities for deprescribing used in general practice and to map the identified activities to pioneering principles of deprescribing.

SETTING

Primary care.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, EMBASE (Ovid), CINAHL, Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), Clinicaltrials.gov, ISRCTN registry, OpenGrey, Annals of Family Medicine, BMC Family Practice, Family Practice and British Journal of General Practice (BJGP) from inception to the end of June 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Included studies were original research (randomised controlled trial, quasi-experimental, cohort study, qualitative and case studies), protocol papers and protocol registrations.

DATA EXTRACTION

Screening and data extraction was completed by one reviewer; 10% of the studies were independently reviewed by a second reviewer. Coding of full-text articles in NVivo was conducted and mapped to five deprescribing principles.

RESULTS

Fifty studies were included. The most frequently used activities were identification of appropriate patients for deprescribing (76%), patient education (50%), general practitioners (GP) education (48%), and development and use of a tapering schedule (38%). Six activities did not align with the five deprescribing principles. As such, two principles (engage practice staff in education and appropriate identification of patients, and provide feedback to staff about deprescribing occurrences within the practice) were added.

CONCLUSION

Activities and guiding principles for deprescribing should be paired together to provide an accessible and comprehensive guide to deprescribing by GPs. The addition of two principles suggests that practice staff and practice management teams may play an instrumental role in sustaining deprescribing processes within clinical practice. Future research is required to determine the most of effective activities to use within each principle and by whom.

Improving medication adherence and effective prescribing through a patient-centered prescription model in patients with multimorbidity

PURPOSE

This study aimed to assess the impact of the patient-centered prescription (PCP) model in medication adherence and effective prescribing in patients with multimorbidity.

METHODS

Uncontrolled before-after study in an intermediate care facility in a mixed urban-rural district. Inpatients aged ≥ 65 years with multimorbidity exposed to polypharmacy before hospital admission were consecutively enrolled. Every patient's treatment plan was analyzed through the PCP model, which includes interventions aimed at improving medication adherence. The primary endpoint was the change in the proportion of adherent patients between pre-admission and after discharge for all regularly scheduled long-term medications, using the proportion of days covered (PDC). Secondary endpoints included the change on mean PDC for all long-term medications, number of long-term medications, proportion of patients with hyperpolypharmacy, medication regimen complexity index (MRCI) score, drug burden index (DBI) score, number of potential inappropriate prescribing (PIP), and proportion of patients with ≥ 2 PIPs.

RESULTS

Ninety-three non-institutionalized patients were included (mean age 83.0 ± SD 6.1 years). The proportion of adherent patients increased from 22.1 to 51.9% (P < 0.001). Intervention also improved mean PDC [mean difference (95% CI) 10.6 (7.7, 13.5)] and effective prescribing through a reduction on the number of long-term medications [- 1.3 (- 1.7, - 0.9)], proportion of patients exposed to hyperpolypharmacy (- 16.1%, P < 0.001), MRCI score [- 2.2 (- 3.4, - 1.0)], DBI score [- 0.16 (- 1.8, - 1.3)], number of PIPs [- 1.6 (- 1.8, - 1.3)], and proportion of patients with ≥ 2 PIPs (- 53.7%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Studied intervention provides significant effective prescribing and medication adherence enhancements in non-institutionalized older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy.

The value of deprescribing in older adults with dementia: a narrative review

Introduction:Mitigating the burden of unnecessary polypharmacy or multiple medication use in people living with dementia has been recognized as a key priority internationally. One approach to reducing inappropriate polypharmacy is through medication withdrawal or deprescribing.Area covered:Non-systematic searches of key databases including PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were conducted from inception to 28 February 2021 for articles that assessed the safety and/or efficacy of deprescribing in older adults living with dementia. Personal reference libraries were also utilized. Information on current clinical trials was found in clinicaltrial.gov.Expert Opinion: There is limited direct evidence to inform deprescribing in older adults with dementia specifically. This review identified nineteen studies that have assessed the impact of deprescribing interventions to reduce inappropriate polypharmacy or direct deprescribing of specific medications. However, the current evidence is limited in scope as most studies focused on medication-related outcomes (e.g. discontinuation of high-risk medications) rather than patient-centered outcomes in individuals living with dementia. Furthermore, most studies focused on addressing inappropriate polypharmacy in older adults with dementia living in long-term care facilities, and interventions did not involve the person and their carer. Further evidence on the impact of deprescribing in this population across clinical settings is needed.

What Makes Deprescription of Psychotropic Drugs in Nursing Home Residents with Dementia so Challenging? A Qualitative Systematic Review of Barriers and Facilitators

Background

Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia are frequently experienced in the nursing home setting and place a substantial burden on patients, relatives, and nursing home staff. Despite guidelines recommending non-pharmacological treatments, psychotropic drugs are often prescribed to address these symptoms. This is the case despite their effects being limited, and there being a risk of side effects and adverse events for the patient. Several studies have aimed to reduce the use of psychotropic drugs, with varying results. The reasons behind these variations are not well understood.

Objectives

The objective of this systematic review was to investigate which factors nursing home general practitioners and nursing home staff experience as barriers or facilitators when attempting to deprescribe psychotropic drugs in nursing home residents.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, psycINFO, Web of Science, and CINAHL between April and September 2020. An inductive method using thematic analysis of the qualitative findings was applied for the derivation of themes. Quantitative studies were included but described descriptively and separately.

Results

Of 8204 unique records, 14 studies were included in the review. Of these, nine were interview or focus group studies and five were survey studies. Thematic analysis resulted in five major themes identified as either facilitators or barriers or both: (1) ‘Operationality and routines’; (2) ‘Lack of resources and qualifications’; (3) ‘Patient-related outcomes’, which points to a strong belief in negative patient-related outcomes of discontinuation and a downplay of side effects of the medication; (4) ‘Policies’, including support and buy-in from nursing home leadership; and (5) ‘Collaboration’ between physicians and nursing home staff. Themes 1 and 4 consist of facilitators. Theme 2 consists of barriers. Theme 3 and 5 consist of both facilitators and barriers. Evaluation of closed-ended questions from the surveys supported the findings.

Conclusions

Deprescribing psychotropic drugs used for behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia in nursing home residents is challenging. Resources need to be in place for deprescribing, as well as there being a focus on the positive patient-related outcomes of doing so. Managerial support, staff routines, and interprofessional collaboration are some factors facilitating the process, in addition to there being routines and systematic procedures in place allowing for operationality and a common understanding. Addressing these barriers and facilitators is necessary to ensure that deprescribing can be understood as meaningful and pursued among healthcare professionals in the nursing home setting.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40266-021-00875-1.

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

AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use in Older Adults with Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias Living in the Community: A Cross-Sectional Analysis

BACKGROUND

With the older adult population in the USA increasing, so is the population of those with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD). Older adults are vulnerable to the effects of potentially inappropriate medications as established by the Beers Criteria; however, some medications continue to be prescribed against recommendations.

OBJECTIVES

Our objectives were to describe potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use linked to cognitive impairment or decline (referred to as Cog-PIM) in older adults with and without ADRD and to investigate whether the odds of Cog-PIM report differ by ADRD status in ambulatory care (i.e., outpatient care) in the USA.

METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis was performed using a nationally representative sample of non-perioperative, office-based ambulatory care visits by adults aged ≥ 65 years in 2016 (n = 218,182,131). Data were collected from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Cog-PIMs were identified as defined in the 2015 Beers Criteria recommendations for medications that may be potentially inappropriate in older adults with cognitive impairment or dementia. ADRD status was determined by clinician report using free text, the ADRD flag, or the presence of a diagnosis code indicating dementia. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to estimate the odds of Cog-PIM use overall and by medication class.

RESULTS

In 2016, 2.1% (n = 4,651,563) of outpatient visits were made by older adults with ADRD, 33.2% of which reported at least one Cog-PIM. Anticholinergic Cog-PIMs were noted in 20.5% of ADRD visits compared with 8.1% of non-ADRD visits. Antipsychotic PIMs were noted in 15.5% of ADRD visits compared with 0.8% of non-ADRD visits. Benzodiazepine and non-benzodiazepine receptor agonist hypnotic (Z drug) Cog-PIMs were reported in 10.9% of ADRD visits and 10.7% of non-ADRD visits. ADRD status was a significant predictor of Cog-PIM report overall (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.74 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.20-6.27]) and for anticholinergics and antipsychotics specifically (aOR 3.35 [95% CI 1.24-9.03] and aOR 22.80 [95% CI 5.80-89.50], respectively).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated a high prevalence of Cog-PIM use and increased odds of Cog-PIM use in older adults with ADRD. Future work should investigate opportunities in the ambulatory care setting for safer prescribing and de-escalation of Cog-PIMs.

Trends and concerns of potentially inappropriate medication use in patients with cardiovascular diseases

Introduction: The use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) is an alarming social risk factor in cardiovascular patients. PIM administration may result in iatrogenic disorders and adverse consequences may be attenuated by limiting PIM intake.Areas covered: The goal of this review article is to discuss the trends, risks, and concerns regarding PIM administration with focus on cardiovascular patients. To find data, we searched literature using electronic databases (Pubmed/Medline 1966-2021 and Web of Science 1975-2021). The data search terms were cardiovascular diseases, potentially inappropriate medication, potentially harmful drug-drug combination, potentially harmful drug-disease combination, drug interaction, deprescribing, and electronic health record.Expert opinion: Drugs for heart diseases are the most commonly prescribed medications in older individuals. Despite the availability of explicit and implicit PIM criteria, the incidence of PIM use in cardiovascular patients remains high ranging from 7 to 85% in different patient categories. Physician-induced disorders often occur when PIM is administered and adverse effects may be reduced by limiting PIM intake. Main strategies promising for addressing PIM use include deprescribing, implementation of systematic electronic records, pharmacist medication review, and collaboration among cardiologists, internists, geriatricians, clinical pharmacologists, pharmacists, and other healthcare professionals as basis of multidisciplinary assessment teams.

Effects of an interprofessional Quality Circle-Deprescribing Module (QC-DeMo) in Swiss nursing homes: a randomised controlled trial

Background

Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are common among nursing homes (NH) residents, as is polypharmacy. Deprescribing has emerged in the past decade as a safe and effective way to reduce the use of PIMs and improve patient outcomes. However, effective deprescribing interventions are expensive, as they require specialised staff and a great amount of time for each resident.

The Quality Circle Deprescribing Module (QC-DeMo) intervention was designed to be less resource-intensive than medication reviews, the current deprescribing gold standard. It consists of a QC session in which physicians, nurses, and pharmacists define a local deprescribing consensus for specific PIMs classes, which is then implemented in the NH. The intervention was trialled in a RCT, with the NH as unit of analysis.

Methods

After randomisation, intervention NHs enacted the QC-DeMo at the start of the follow-up year. The primary outcomes were the proportion of PIM galenic units and number of PIM defined daily dose per average resident and per day (DDD/res). PIM status was assessed by a combination of the 2015 Beers list and the Norwegian General Practice-Nursing Home criteria. Secondary outcomes were the number of DDD/res to avoid and to reevaluate; safety outcomes were mortality, hospitalisations, falls, and use of physical restraints. Outcomes were evaluated at follow-up using linear regression models, adjusting for the outcome baseline values.

Results

Fifty-eight NHs took part in the trial; no individual residents were recruited. The intervention did not reduce the primary outcomes, but a strong trend towards reduction was seen for the number of PIM DDD/res, which accounts for the doses used. PIM DDD/res to reevaluate were significantly reduced, mostly through a reduction in the use of proton-pump inhibitors. Falls and use of physical restraints were not affected, but a statistical interaction between the mission of the NH (geriatric unit or specialised dementia unit) and the intervention group was seen for mortality and hospitalisations.

Conclusions

The QC-DeMo intervention can reduce the use of some PIM classes, and could usefully complement other deprescribing interventions.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03688542), registered on 26.09.2018, retrospectively registered.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-021-02220-y.

Clinical Outcomes After Discontinuation of Thyroid Hormone Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Levothyroxine (LT4) is one of the most commonly prescribed medications. Although considered a life-long replacement therapy, LT4 therapy can be discontinued for some patients. This study aims at: (i) reviewing the evidence on clinical outcomes of patients undergoing thyroid hormone replacement discontinuation, (ii) identifying the predictors of successful discontinuation, and (iii) systematically appraising frameworks used for deprescribing thyroid hormone. Methods: We searched multiple bibliographic databases, including Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus, from inception to February 2020 for studies in which thyroid hormone replacement was discontinued. Clinical outcomes assessed included: proportion of patients that remained euthyroid or needed to restart thyroid hormone replacement after discontinuation and frequency of clinical symptoms of hypothyroidism and adverse effects. We also evaluated predictors for discontinuation and deprescribing frameworks. Reviewers (F.J.K.T., N.B., N.M.S.O., S.M.) evaluated studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality independently and in duplicate. Results: Seventeen observational studies at moderate to high risk of bias met inclusion criteria, including a total of 1103 patients (86% women) with an age range of 2-81 years. Approximately a third of patients undergoing thyroid hormone discontinuation remained euthyroid at follow-up (37.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI 24.2-50.1%], I² 97.5%). Subgroup analysis showed that patients with a previous diagnosis of overt hypothyroidism (OH) were less likely to remain euthyroid (11.8% [CI 0.4-23.2%], I² 90.3%) than patients with a prior diagnosis of subclinical hypothyroidism (SCH) (35.6% [CI 8.2-62.9%], I² 94.0%). No study followed a framework for systematically deprescribing LT4. Conclusions: Low-quality evidence suggests that up to a third of patients remained euthyroid after thyroid hormone discontinuation, with a higher proportion of patients with an initial diagnosis of SCH remaining euthyroid than patients with an initial diagnosis of OH. A deprescribing framework focusing on adequate selection of patients for deprescribing LT4 and a systematic process is warranted to guide clinicians in re-evaluating the need for LT4 in their patients.

Potentially inappropriate proton-pump inhibitor prescription in the general population: a claims-based retrospective time trend analysis

BACKGROUND

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) are among the most prescribed drugs worldwide, and a large body of evidence raises concerns about their inappropriate use. Previous estimates of inappropriate use varied due to different definitions and study populations.

AIMS

We aimed to measure the population-based incidence and time trends of PPI and potentially inappropriate PPI prescriptions (PIPPI) with a novel method, continuously assessing excessive cumulative doses based on clinical practice guidelines. We also assessed association of patient characteristics with PPI prescriptions and PIPPI.

METHODS

This was an observational study based on a large insurance claims database of persons aged >18 years with continuous claims records of ⩾12 months. The observation period was January 2012 to December 2017. We assessed the incidence and time trends of PPI prescriptions and PIPPI based on doses prescribed, defining ⩾11.5 g of pantoprazole dose equivalents during any consecutive 365 days (average daily dose >31 mg) as inappropriate.

RESULTS

Among 1,726,491 eligible persons, the annual incidence of PPI prescriptions increased from 19.7% (2012) to 23.0% (2017), (p = <0.001), and the incidence of PIPPI increased from 4.8% (2013) to 6.4% (2017), (p = <0.001). Age, male gender, drugs with bleeding risk and multimorbidity were independent determinants of PIPPI (p = <0.001 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence that one of the most prescribed drug groups is commonly prescribed inappropriately in the general population and that this trend is increasing. Multimorbidity and drugs with bleeding risks were strong determinants of PIPPI. Addressing PPI prescriptions exceeding guideline recommendations could reduce polypharmacy and improve patient safety.

Less Is More: The Impact of Deprescribing Psychotropic Drugs on Behavioral and Psychological Symptoms and Daily Functioning in Nursing Home Patients. Results From the Cluster-Randomized Controlled COSMOS Trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of medication reviews using collegial mentoring and systematic clinical evaluation on psychotropic prescriptions, behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD), and activities of daily living (ADL).

DESIGN

Four-month multicenter, multicomponent, cluster-randomized, single-blinded controlled trial.

SETTING

Thirty-three Norwegian nursing homes including 67 nursing home wards (clusters).

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 723 enrolled patients, of which 428 participated in the study; 217 were randomized to the intervention and 211 to care as usual (control).

INTERVENTION

The COSMOS intervention consisted of Communication, Systematic pain management, Medication reviews, Organization of activities, and Safety. During medication review, the nursing home physician evaluated treatment with colleagues systematically using the results from validated clinical assessments.

MEASUREMENTS

Mean changes from baseline to month 4 in the number of prescribed psychotropic drugs (antipsychotics, anxiolytics, hypnotics or sedatives, antidepressants, and antidementia drugs); Neuropsychiatric Inventory Nursing Home Version (NPI-NH) and Cornell Scale of Depression in Dementia (CSDD); Lawton and Brody's Physical Self Maintenance Scale (PSMS).

RESULTS

Compared to control, the mean change in prescribed psychotropic drugs was reduced both in total and regular number, while mean changes in NPI-NH and CSDD scores did not differ between the groups. Mean change in PSMS showed improvement in the intervention group, and deterioration in the control group.

CONCLUSION

Medication reviews using collegial mentoring and systematic clinical evaluation led to safe deprescribing, as the reductions in psychotropic drug use did not negatively affect BPSD, while ADL improved.