REDUCING POTENTIALLY INAPPROPRIATE PRESCRIBING FOR OLDER PEOPLE IN PRIMARY CARE: COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF THE OPTI-SCRIPT INTERVENTION

Lists of potentially inappropriate medications for older people in primary care: a systematic review of health outcomes

This study is a systematic literature review of the association between lists of potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) in clinical practice and health outcomes of older adults followed up in primary health care. For this purpose, the PRISMA protocol was used to systematize the search for articles in the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Central, LIVIVO and LILACS databases, in addition to the gray literature. Studies with randomized clinical trials were selected, using explicit criteria (lists) for the identification and management of PIM in prescriptions of older patients in primary care. Of the 2,400 articles found, six were used for data extraction. The interventions resulted in significant reductions in the number of PIM and adverse drug events and, consequently, in potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIP) in polymedicated older adults. However, there were no significant effects of the interventions on negative clinical outcomes, such as emergency room visits, hospitalizations and death, or on improving the health status of the older adults. The use of PIM lists promotes adequate medication prescriptions for older adults in primary health care, but further studies are needed to determine the impact of reducing PIM on primary clinical outcomes.

Measuring Quality of Life in Deprescribing Trials: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Quality of life (QoL) is an important outcome to capture in clinical trials evaluating deprescribing interventions.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to conduct a scoping review to examine how QoL has been measured in deprescribing trials among older people and identify potentially relevant QoL scales, to better inform QoL measurement in future deprescribing trials.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, Epistemonikos, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of eligible studies (from inception to October 2023). We included randomized and non-randomized comparative studies with a control group that evaluated deprescribing and polypharmacy reduction interventions in people ≥ 65 years of age and measured QoL as an outcome. We also included studies describing the development and validation of QoL scales related to deprescribing, polypharmacy, or medication burden in adults ≥ 18 years of age. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts, then full texts. Two independent reviewers extracted data from 25% of eligible studies in order to verify agreement, then a single reviewer extracted data from the remaining studies, which a second reviewer cross-checked. We critically appraised scales based on the COSMIN checklist.

RESULTS

We retrieved 7290 articles, of which 52 were eligible for inclusion, including 44 deprescribing trials and eight scale development studies. From these studies, we found 21 scales that have been used in the context of deprescribing/polypharmacy (12 generic scales used in clinical trials and nine medication-specific scales). Variations of the generic EQ-5D were the most used scales. The measurement properties of scales for capturing changes in QoL from deprescribing were uncertain. Medication-specific QoL scales have not been employed in deprescribing clinical trials and thus, their performance in this context is also not clear.

CONCLUSIONS

Several existing QoL scales have been applied to the context of deprescribing/polypharmacy clinical trials, and new scales specific to the problem have been proposed. If deprescribing does impact QoL, our findings suggest it is uncertain whether existing QoL scales can practically and reliably capture such a change or whether any scale is best. However, this review compares various aspects of the scales that researchers and clinicians can consider in decisions about measuring QoL in deprescribing trials, and in planning future research.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework: osf.io/aez6w.

A systematic review of economic evaluations of pharmacist services

BACKGROUND

Challenges to the provision of health care are occurring internationally and are expected to increase in the future, further increasing health spending. As pharmacist roles are evolving and expanding internationally to provide individualised pharmaceutical care it is important to assess the cost-effectiveness of these services.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically synthesise the international literature regarding published economic evaluations of pharmacy services to assess their cost-effectiveness and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of economic evaluations of pharmacy services was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, IPA and online journals with search functions likely to publish economic evaluations of pharmacy services. Data were extracted regarding the interventions, the time horizon, the outcomes and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Studies' quality of reporting was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standard (CHEERS) statement.

RESULTS

Seventy-five studies were included in the systematic review, including 67 cost-effectiveness analyses, 6 cost-benefit analyses and 2 cost-consequence analyses. Of these, 57 were either dominant or cost-effective using a willingness-to-pay threshold of NZ$46 645 per QALY. A further 11 studies' cost-effectiveness were unable to be evaluated. Interventions considered to be most cost-effective included pharmacist medication reviews, pharmacist adherence strategies and pharmacist management of type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension and warfarin/INR monitoring. The quality of reporting of studies differed with no studies reporting all 28 items of the CHEERS statement.

CONCLUSIONS

There is strong economic evidence to support investment in extended pharmacist services, particularly those focussed on long-term chronic health conditions.

Healthcare costs of adverse drug reactions and potentially inappropriate prescribing in older adults: a population-based study

OBJECTIVES

To describe the distribution of costs based on potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and adverse drug reaction (ADR) status in terms of total direct costs and costs caused by ADRs, among older adults.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study was conducted among older adults, identified from a random sample of the general Swedish population. PIP was identified based on the Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria and ADRs were identified using the Howard criteria. Causality between PIP and ADRs was evaluated using Hallas' criteria. Prevalence-based direct healthcare costs were calculated for the 3-month study period, including the total cost for healthcare and drugs, and the cost caused by ADRs.

SETTING

All care levels, including primary care, other outpatient care and inpatient care.

PARTICIPANTS

813 adults ≥65 years.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The prevalence and cost of PIP and ADRs.

RESULTS

Total direct cost for persons with PIP was approximately twice the total cost of those without PIP (€1958 (€1428-€2616) vs €881 (€817-€1167), p=0.0020). The costs caused by ADRs was 10 times higher among persons with PIP, compared with those without PIP (€270 (€86-€545) vs €27 (€10-€61), p=0.047). For persons with ADRs caused by PIP, total direct costs were €4646 (€2617-€7931). This group represented 8% of the study population and used 25% of the costs. The main cost driver in all studied patient groups was healthcare contacts.

CONCLUSIONS

Older persons with PIP and ADRs had high healthcare costs, particularly when ADRs were caused by PIP. Since these costs appear to be substantial, the potential savings by preventing their occurrence may, to a certain degree, cover the added cost of such activities. Further studies should be undertaken to provide further evidence on the costs of PIP, ADRs and ADRs caused by PIP.

Cost-effectiveness of an educational intervention to reduce potentially inappropriate medication

Background

Educational interventions can reduce potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in older people. Their effectiveness has been measured mainly as changes in PIM use. In this economic evaluation, we analyse the impact of an educational intervention in terms of costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).

Methods

The educational intervention consisted of activating and interactive training sessions for nursing staff and consulting physicians, and was compared with treatment as usual (TAU). Participants (n = 227) in a cluster randomised trial (cRCT) were residents living permanently in assisted living facilities (n = 20 wards). For economic evaluation, participants’ healthcare service use costs and costs for the intervention were estimated for a 12 month period.

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated for QALYs per participant. Cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from a healthcare perspective. A bootstrapped cost-effectiveness plane and one-way sensitivity analysis were undertaken to analyse the uncertainty surrounding the estimates.

Results

The educational intervention was estimated to be less costly and less effective in terms of QALYs than TAU at the 12 month follow-up [incremental costs –€1,629, confidence interval (CI) –€5,489 to €2,240; incremental effect −0.02, CI –0.06 to 0.02]. The base case ICER was >€80,000/QALY.

Conclusion

The educational intervention was estimated to be less costly and less effective in terms of QALYs compared with TAU, but the results are subject to some uncertainties. Reduction in PIM use or benefits in quality of life did not seem to translate into improvements in QALYs. Our findings emphasise the need for better understanding of the impact of decreasing PIM use on health outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness of a structured medication review approach for multimorbid older adults: Within-trial analysis of the OPERAM study

Background

Inappropriate polypharmacy has been linked with adverse outcomes in older, multimorbid adults. OPERAM is a European cluster-randomized trial aimed at testing the effect of a structured pharmacotherapy optimization intervention on preventable drug-related hospital admissions in multimorbid adults with polypharmacy aged 70 years or older. Clinical results of the trial showed a pattern of reduced drug-related hospital admissions, but without statistical significance. In this study we assessed the cost-effectiveness of the pharmacotherapy optimisation intervention.

Methods

We performed a pre-planned within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of the OPERAM intervention, from a healthcare system perspective. All data were collected within the trial apart from unit costs. QALYs were computed by applying the crosswalk German valuation algorithm to EQ-5D-5L-based quality of life data. Considering the clustered structure of the data and between-country heterogeneity, we applied Generalized Structural Equation Models (GSEMs) on a multiple imputed sample to estimate costs and QALYs. We also performed analyses by country and subgroup analyses by patient and morbidity characteristics.

Results

Trial-wide, the intervention was numerically dominant, with a potential cost-saving of CHF 3’588 (95% confidence interval (CI): -7’716; 540) and gain of 0.025 QALYs (CI: -0.002; 0.052) per patient. Robustness analyses confirmed the validity of the GSEM model. Subgroup analyses suggested stronger effects in people at higher risk.

Conclusion

We observed a pattern towards dominance, potentially resulting from an accumulation of multiple small positive intervention effects. Our methodological approaches may inform other CEAs of multi-country, cluster-randomized trials facing presence of missing values and heterogeneity between centres/countries.

Deprescribing Interventions among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations

BACKGROUND

Deprescribing can reduce the use of inappropriate or unnecessary medication; however, the economic value of such interventions is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

This study seeks to identify and synthetise the economic evidence of deprescribing interventions among community-dwelling older adults.

METHODS

Full economic evaluation studies of deprescribing interventions, conducted in the community or primary care settings, in community-dwelling adults aged ≥ 65 years were systematically reviewed. MEDLINE, EconLit, Scopus, Web of Science, CEA-TUFTS, CRD York and Google Scholar databases were searched from inception to February 2021. Two researchers independently screened all retrieved articles according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. The main outcome was the economic impact of the intervention from any perspective, converted into 2019 US Dollars. The World Health Organization threshold of 1 gross domestic product per capita was used to define cost effectiveness. Studies were appraised for methodological quality using the extended Consensus on Health Economics Criteria checklist.

RESULTS

Of 6154 articles identified by the search strategy, 14 papers assessing 13 different interventions were included. Most deprescribing interventions included some type of medication review with or without a supportive educational component (n = 11, 85%), and in general were delivered within a pharmacist-physician care collaboration. Settings included community pharmacies, primary care/outpatient clinics and patients' homes. All economic evaluations were conducted within a time horizon varying from 2 to 12 months with outcomes in most of the studies derived from a single clinical trial. Main health outcomes were reported in terms of quality-adjusted life-years, prevented number of falls and the medication appropriateness index. Cost effectiveness ranged from dominant to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $112,932 per quality-adjusted life-year, a value above the country's World Health Organization threshold. Overall, 85% of the interventions were cost saving, dominated usual care or were cost effective considering 1 gross domestic product per capita. Nine studies scored > 80% (good) and two scored ≤ 50% (low) on critical quality appraisal.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a growing interest in economic evaluations of deprescribing interventions focused on community-dwelling older adults. Although results varied across setting, time horizon and intervention, most were cost effective according to the World Health Organization threshold. Deprescribing interventions are promising from an economic viewpoint, but more studies are needed.

Using the behavior change wheel to link published deprescribing strategies to identified local primary healthcare needs

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy is a major global problem. Evidence in primary care shows deprescribing can be beneficial. Behaviour change theories such as the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) can help develop successful implementation of deprescribing initiatives.

OBJECTIVES

To link locally identified deprescribing influencers with components of successfully trialed deprescribing strategies, with the aim of informing the development of local deprescribing initiatives.

METHODS

Two background studies were completed. A qualitative study of interviews and focus groups identified influencers of deprescribing from local primary care physicians, nurse practitioners, and pharmacists. Transcripts were coded using the TDF and mapped to the Intervention Functions of the BCW. A scoping review identified studies that investigated primary care deprescribing strategies, which were mapped to the BCW Intervention Functions and the Behaviour Change Techniques (BCTs). For this analysis, six main TDF domains from the qualitative study were linked to the BCTs identified in the scoping review through the Intervention Functions of the BCW.

RESULTS

Within the BCW component Capability, one TDF domain identified in the qualitative study, Memory, Attention and Decision Process, was linked to strategies like academic detailing from the scoping review. For the Opportunity component, two TDF domains, Social Influences and Environmental Context and Resources, were linked to strategies such as pharmacist medication reviews, providing patient information leaflets, and evidence-based deprescribing tools. For the Motivation component, three TDF domains, Social/Professional Role and Identity, Intentions, and Beliefs about Consequences, were linked to strategies such as sending deprescribing information to prescribers, using tools to identify eligible patients, and having patients report adverse events of medications.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis identified deprescribing strategies that can be used to address influencers related to behaviour change from the perspective of primary care providers, and to assist with future deprescribing initiative development and implementation in the local context.

[Prescription appropriateness in elderly patients with polypharmacy in primary care: Cluster-randomized controlled trial PHARM-PC]

Objetivos

Evaluar la efectividad de la revisión sistemática de medicación realizada por farmacéutico sobre medicaciones potencialmente inapropiadas (MPI), resultados en salud y costes.

Diseño

Ensayo clínico prospectivo, abierto, controlado y aleatorizado por clústeres.

Emplazamiento

Seis centros de atención primaria de las Islas Baleares.

Participantes

Se incluyeron 42 clústeres (21 por grupo), y 549 pacientes de ≥ 65 años y ≥ 5 medicamentos crónicos, de los cuales 277 se asignaron al Grupo Intervención (GI) y 272 al Grupo Control (GC). Se excluyeron pacientes: institucionalizados, desplazados, atendidos habitualmente por la sanidad privada, o en atención domiciliaria.

Intervención

Detección de MPI por parte del farmacéutico mediante combinación de métodos explícitos e implícitos y comunicación de las alternativas terapéuticas más apropiadas al médico prescriptor.

Mediciones

Se evaluaron la proporción de pacientes con MPI y número medio de MPI/paciente (variables principales); así como morbilidad, mortalidad, y costes (variables secundarias).

Análisis estadístico

Siguiendo el principio de intención de tratar, se compararon las variables cuantitativas y cualitativas mediante las pruebas t Student y X², respectivamente. Los resultados se expresaron como diferencia de proporciones para variables cualitativas y diferencia de medias para cuantitativas, con los correspondientes intervalos de confianza 95% (IC 95%).

Resultados

Después de la intervención, la proporción de pacientes con MPI disminuyó un 13,7% (IC 95%: 9,3; 18,2) más en GI que GC. El número medio de MPI/paciente y coste medio de MPI/paciente disminuyeron en 0,43 (IC 95%: 0,32; 0,54) y 72,11€ (IC 95%: 26,15; 118,06) más en GI que GC, respectivamente. Sin embargo, no se observaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en morbilidad, mortalidad ni en costes de episodios asistenciales.

Conclusiones

La detección de MPI y emisión de recomendaciones por el farmacéutico pudo contribuir a reducir significativamente MPI y gasto en medicamentos, pero sin alcanzar diferencias estadísticamente significativas en morbimortalidad ni costes de episodios asistenciales.

Prevalence and predictors of potentially inappropriate prescribing in middle-aged adults: a repeated cross-sectional study

Background

Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is common in older adults and known to be associated with polypharmacy and multimorbidity. Less is known about the prevalence and causes of PIP in middle-aged adults.

Aim

To determine the prevalence and predictors of PIP in middle-aged adults.

Design and setting

A repeated cross-sectional study was conducted using primary care data in London.

Method

PIP was defined using the PRescribing Optimally in Middle-aged People’s Treatments (PROMPT) criteria. Prescribing and demographic data were extracted from Lambeth DataNet (LDN), a pseudonymised database of all patients registered at general practices in Lambeth, for those aged 45–64 years prescribed ≥1 medicines in each year from 2014–2019 (n = 46 633–52 582). Prevalence and trends over 6 years were investigated, including the association of PIP with polypharmacy, multimorbidity, deprivation, sex, and age.

Results

The prevalence of PIP decreased from 20% in 2014 to 18% in 2019. The most prevalent PROMPT criteria in 2019 were the use of ≥2 drugs from the same pharmacological class (7.6%), use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for >3 months (7.1%) and use of proton pump inhibitors above recommended maintenance dosages for >8 weeks (3.1%). Over the study period, the prevalence of multimorbidity increased (47–52%) and polypharmacy remained stable (27%). Polypharmacy, multimorbidity, deprivation, and age were independently associated with PIP. Sex was the only variable not associated with PIP.

Conclusion

Almost one-fifth of middle-aged adults prescribed medicines are exposed to PIP, as defined by the PROMPT criteria. This is likely to be linked with exposure to avoidable adverse drug events. The PROMPT criteria may provide a useful aid in interventions to optimise prescribing.

Economic Evaluations of Interventions to Optimize Medication Use in Older Adults with Polypharmacy and Multimorbidity: A Systematic Review

Purpose

To conduct a systematic review of the economic impact of interventions intended at optimizing medication use in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy.

Methods

We searched Ovid-Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Ageline, Cochrane, and Web of Science, for articles published between 2004 and 2020 that studied older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. The intervention studied had to be aimed at optimizing medication use and present results on costs.

Results

Out of 3,871 studies identified by the search strategy, eleven studies were included. The interventions involved different provider types, with a majority described as a multidisciplinary team involving a pharmacist and a general practitioner, in the decision-making process. Interventions were generally associated with a reduction in medication expenditure. The benefits of the intervention in terms of clinical outcomes remain limited. Five studies were cost-benefit analyses, which had a net benefit that was either null or positive. Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios that were generally within the willingness-to-pay thresholds of the countries in which the studies were conducted. However, the quality of the studies was generally low. Omission of key cost elements of economic evaluations, including intervention cost and payer perspective, limited interpretability.

Conclusion

Interventions to optimize medication use may provide benefits that outweigh their implementation costs, but the evidence remains limited. There is a need to identify and address barriers to the scaling-up of such interventions, starting with the current incentive structures for pharmacists, physicians, and patients.

Process evaluation of implementation strategies to reduce potentially inappropriate medication prescribing in older population: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Several implementation strategies can reduce potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) prescribing. Although use of PIMs has declined in recent years, it remains prevalent. Various strategies exist to improve the appropriateness of medication use. However, little is known about the processes of these different implementation strategies. This scoping review aims to investigate how the process evaluation of implementation strategies for reducing PIM prescribing in the older population has been studied.

METHODS

We searched for process evaluations of implementation strategies for reducing PIM prescribing in PUBMED, SCOPUS and Web of Science published between January 2000 and November 2019 in English. We applied the following inclusion criteria: patients aged ≥65 years, validated PIM criteria, and implementation process evaluated. The review focuses on decision support for health care professionals. We described the findings of the process evaluations, and compared the authors' concepts of process evaluation of the included publications to those of Proctor et al.( 2010).

RESULT

Of 9131 publications screened, 29 met our inclusion criteria. Different process evaluation conceptualizations were identified. Most process evaluations took place in the initial stages of the process (acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, and feasibility) and sustainability and implementation costs were seldom evaluated. None of the included publications evaluated fidelity. Multifaceted interventions were the most studied implementation strategies. Medication review was more common in acceptability evaluations, multidisciplinary interventions in adoption evaluations, and computerized systems and educational interventions in feasibility evaluations. Process evaluations were studied from the health care professionals' viewpoint in most of the included publications, but the management viewpoint was missing.

DISCUSSION

The conceptualization of process evaluation in the field of PIM prescribing is indeterminate. There is also a current gap in the knowledge of sustainability and implementation costs. Clarifying the conceptualization of implementation process evaluation is essential in order to effectively translate research knowledge into practice.

Deprescribing for Community-Dwelling Older Adults: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy and use of inappropriate medications have been linked to increased risk of falls, hospitalizations, cognitive impairment, and death. The primary objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness, comparative effectiveness, and harms of deprescribing interventions among community-dwelling older adults.

METHODS

We searched OVID MEDLINE Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library from 1990 through February 2019 for controlled clinical trials comparing any deprescribing intervention to usual care or another intervention. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, hospitalizations, health-related quality of life, and falls. The secondary outcome was use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). Interventions were categorized as comprehensive medication review, educational initiatives, and computerized decision support. Data abstracted by one investigator were verified by another. We used the Cochrane criteria to rate risk of bias for each study and the GRADE system to determine certainty of evidence (COE) for primary outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight low and medium risk of bias clinical trials were included. Comprehensive medication review may have reduced all-cause mortality (OR 0.74, 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.95, I2 = 0, k = 12, low COE) but probably had little to no effect on falls, health-related quality of life, or hospitalizations (low to moderate COE). Nine of thirteen trials reported fewer PIMs in the intervention group. Educational interventions probably had little to no effect on all-cause mortality, hospitalizations, or health-related quality of life (low to moderate COE). The effect on falls was uncertain (very low COE). All 11 education trials that included PIMs reported fewer in the intervention than in the control groups. Two of 4 computerized decision support trials reported fewer PIMs in the intervention arms; none included any primary outcomes.

DISCUSSION

In community-dwelling people aged 65 years and older, medication deprescribing interventions may provide small reductions in mortality and use of potentially inappropriate medications.

REGISTRY INFORMATION

PROSPERO - CRD42019132420.

The evolution of an evidence based intervention designed to improve prescribing and reduce polypharmacy in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy in primary care (SPPiRE)

Introduction

By the time an intervention is ready for evaluation in a definitive RCT the context of the evidence base may have evolved. To avoid research waste, it is imperative that intervention design and evaluation is an adaptive process incorporating emerging evidence and novel concepts. The aim of this study is to describe changes that were made to an evidence based intervention at the protocol stage of the definitive RCT to incorporate emerging evidence.

Methods

The original evidence based intervention, a GP delivered web guided medication review, was modified in a five step process:Identification of core components of the original intervention.Literature review.Modification of the intervention.Pilot study.Final refinements. A framework, developed in public health research, was utilised to describe the modification process.

Results

The population under investigation changed from older people with a potentially inappropriate prescription (PIP) to older people with significant polypharmacy, a proxy marker for complex multimorbidity. An assessment of treatment priorities and brown bag medication review, with a focus on deprescribing were incorporated into the original intervention. The number of repeat medicines was added as a primary outcome measure as were additional secondary patient reported outcome measures to assess treatment burden and attitudes towards deprescribing.

Conclusions

A framework was used to systematically describe how and why the original intervention was modified, allowing the new intervention to build upon an effective and robustly developed intervention but also to be relevant in the context of the current evidence base.

Deprescribing interventions in primary health care mapped to the Behaviour Change Wheel: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy and inappropriate medication use are an increasing concern. Deprescribing may improve medication use through planned and supervised dose reduction or stopping of medications. As most medication management occurs in primary health care, which is generally described as the first point of access for day-to-day care, deprescribing in primary health care is the focus on this review.

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aimed to identify and characterize strategies for deprescribing in primary health care and map the strategies to the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW).

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted that involved searches of six databases (2002-2018) and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews and included studies. Studies that described and evaluated deprescribing strategies in primary health care were eligible. Two independent reviewers screened articles and completed data charting with charting verified by a third. Deprescribing strategies were mapped to the intervention functions of the BCW and linked to specific Behaviour Change Techniques (BCT).

RESULTS

Searches yielded 6871 citations of which 43 were included. Nineteen studies were randomized, 24 were non-randomized. Studies evaluated deprescribing in terms of medication changes, feasibility, and prescriber/patient perspectives. Deprescribing strategies involved various professionals (physicians, pharmacists, nurses), as well as patients and were generally multifaceted. A wide range of intervention functions were identified, with 41 BCTs mapped to Environmental restructuring, 38 BCTs mapped to Enablement, and 34 BCTs mapped to Persuasion.

CONCLUSIONS

Deprescribing strategies in primary health care have used a variety of BCTs to address individual professionals (e.g. education) as well as strategies that addressed the practice setting, including support from additional team members (e.g. pharmacists, nurses and patients). Further research is warranted to determine comparative effectiveness of different BCTs, which can help facilitate implementation of deprescribing strategies, thereby reducing polypharmacy, in primary health care.

Interventions to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy for older people

BACKGROUND

Inappropriate polypharmacy is a particular concern in older people and is associated with negative health outcomes. Choosing the best interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy is a priority, hence interest in appropriate polypharmacy, where many medicines may be used to achieve better clinical outcomes for patients, is growing. This is the second update of this Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine which interventions, alone or in combination, are effective in improving the appropriate use of polypharmacy and reducing medication-related problems in older people.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and two trials registers up until 7 February 2018, together with handsearching of reference lists to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series. Eligible studies described interventions affecting prescribing aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in people aged 65 years and older, prescribed polypharmacy (four or more medicines), which used a validated tool to assess prescribing appropriateness. These tools can be classified as either implicit tools (judgement-based/based on expert professional judgement) or explicit tools (criterion-based, comprising lists of drugs to be avoided in older people).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts of eligible studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. We pooled study-specific estimates, and used a random-effects model to yield summary estimates of effect and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 32 studies, 20 from this update. Included studies consisted of 18 randomised trials, 10 cluster randomised trials (one of which was a stepped-wedge design), two non-randomised trials and two controlled before-after studies. One intervention consisted of computerised decision support (CDS); and 31 were complex, multi-faceted pharmaceutical-care based approaches (i.e. the responsible provision of medicines to improve patient's outcomes), one of which incorporated a CDS component as part of their multi-faceted intervention. Interventions were provided in a variety of settings. Interventions were delivered by healthcare professionals such as general physicians, pharmacists and geriatricians, and all were conducted in high-income countries. Assessments using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, found that there was a high and/or unclear risk of bias across a number of domains. Based on the GRADE approach, the overall certainty of evidence for each pooled outcome ranged from low to very low.It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care improves medication appropriateness (as measured by an implicit tool), mean difference (MD) -4.76, 95% CI -9.20 to -0.33; 5 studies, N = 517; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the number of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.22, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.05; 7 studies; N = 1832; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the proportion of patients with one or more PIMs, (risk ratio (RR) 0.79, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.02; 11 studies; N = 3079; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may slightly reduce the number of potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) (SMD -0.81, 95% CI -0.98 to -0.64; 2 studies; N = 569; low-certainty evidence), however it must be noted that this effect estimate is based on only two studies, which had serious limitations in terms of risk bias. Likewise, it is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the proportion of patients with one or more PPOs (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.85; 5 studies; N = 1310; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may make little or no difference in hospital admissions (data not pooled; 12 studies; N = 4052; low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may make little or no difference in quality of life (data not pooled; 12 studies; N = 3211; low-certainty evidence). Medication-related problems were reported in eight studies (N = 10,087) using different terms (e.g. adverse drug reactions, drug-drug interactions). No consistent intervention effect on medication-related problems was noted across studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It is unclear whether interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy, such as reviews of patients' prescriptions, resulted in clinically significant improvement; however, they may be slightly beneficial in terms of reducing potential prescribing omissions (PPOs); but this effect estimate is based on only two studies, which had serious limitations in terms of risk bias.