Structured Interventions to Optimize Polypharmacy in Psychiatric Treatment and Nursing Homes: A Systematic Review

Deprescribing interventions in older adults: An overview of systematic reviews

OBJECTIVE

The growing deprescribing field is challenged by a lack of consensus around evidence and knowledge gaps. The objective of this overview of systematic reviews was to summarize the review evidence for deprescribing interventions in older adults.

METHODS

11 databases were searched from 1st January 2005 to 16th March 2023 to identify systematic reviews. We summarized and synthesized the results in two steps. Step 1 summarized results reported by the included reviews (including meta-analyses). Step 2 involved a narrative synthesis of review results by outcome. Outcomes included medication-related outcomes (e.g., medication reduction, medication appropriateness) or twelve other outcomes (e.g., mortality, adverse events). We summarized outcomes according to subgroups (patient characteristics, intervention type and setting) when direct comparisons were available within the reviews. The quality of included reviews was assessed using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2).

RESULTS

We retrieved 3,228 unique citations and assessed 135 full-text articles for eligibility. Forty-eight reviews (encompassing 17 meta-analyses) were included. Thirty-one of the 48 reviews had a general deprescribing focus, 16 focused on specific medication classes or therapeutic categories and one included both. Twelve of 17 reviews meta-analyzed medication-related outcomes (33 outcomes: 25 favored the intervention, 7 found no difference, 1 favored the comparison). The narrative synthesis indicated that most interventions resulted in some evidence of medication reduction while for other outcomes we found primarily no evidence of an effect. Results were mixed for adverse events and few reviews reported adverse drug withdrawal events. Limited information was available for people with dementia, frailty and multimorbidity. All but one review scored low or critically low on quality assessment.

CONCLUSION

Deprescribing interventions likely resulted in medication reduction but evidence on other outcomes, in particular relating to adverse events, or in vulnerable subgroups or settings was limited. Future research should focus on designing studies powered to examine harms, patient-reported outcomes, and effects on vulnerable subgroups.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020178860.

Psychotropic Medication Prescribing Across Medical Providers, 2016-2019

OBJECTIVE

The authors sought to provide updated estimates of the proportion of psychotropic medications prescribed by different medical providers.

METHODS

This pooled cross-sectional study used data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2016-2019). Nationally representative estimates of the percentages of all psychotropic medications prescribed by each provider type were calculated, and analyses stratified by medication type, insurance type, and age were conducted.

RESULTS

Data from 58,547 psychotropic prescriptions reported by 7,693 unique individuals were analyzed. More than 60% of psychotropic medications were prescribed by providers other than psychiatrists (33.5%) or psychologists (2.2%), such as general practitioners, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants. This distribution varied significantly by medication, insurance, and patient age.

CONCLUSIONS

Most psychotropic medication prescribing occurs in primary care; however, notable differences by medication, insurance, and age were observed, suggesting areas for future research.

Cumulative Update of a Systematic Overview Evaluating Interventions Addressing Polypharmacy

Importance

Polypharmacy is associated with mortality, falls, hospitalizations, and functional and cognitive decline. The study of polypharmacy-related interventions has increased substantially, prompting the need for an updated, more focused systematic overview.

Objective

To systematically evaluate and summarize evidence across multiple systematic reviews (SRs) examining interventions addressing polypharmacy.

Evidence Review

A search was conducted of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects for articles published from January 2017-October 2022, as well as those identified in a previous overview (January 2004-February 2017). Systematic reviews were included regardless of study design, setting, or outcome. The evidence was summarized by 4 categories: (1) medication-related process outcomes (eg, potentially inappropriate medication [PIM] and potential prescribing omission reductions), (2) clinical and functional outcomes, (3) health care use and economic outcomes, and (4) acceptability of the intervention.

Findings

Fourteen SRs were identified (3 from the previous overview), 7 of which included meta-analyses, representing 179 unique published studies. Nine SRs examined medication-related process outcomes (low to very low evidence quality). Systematic reviews using pooled analyses found significant reductions in the number of PIMs, potential prescribing omissions, and total number of medications, and improvements in medication appropriateness. Twelve SRs examined clinical and functional outcomes (very low to moderate evidence quality). Five SRs examined mortality; all mortality meta-analyses were null, but studies with longer follow-up periods found greater reductions in mortality. Five SRs examined falls incidence; results were predominantly null save for a meta-analysis in which PIMs were discontinued. Of the 8 SRs examining quality of life, most (7) found predominantly null effects. Ten SRs examined hospitalizations and readmissions (very low to moderate evidence quality) and 4 examined emergency department visits (very low to low evidence quality). One SR found significant reductions in hospitalizations and readmissions among higher-intensity medication reviews with face-to-face patient components. Another meta-analysis found a null effect. Of the 7 SRs without meta-analyses for hospitalizations and readmissions, all had predominantly null results. Two of 4 SRs found reductions in emergency department visits. Two SRs examined acceptability (very low evidence quality), finding wide variation in the adoption of polypharmacy-related interventions.

Conclusions and Relevance

This updated systematic overview noted little evidence of an association between polypharmacy-related interventions and reduced important clinical and health care use outcomes. More evidence is needed regarding which interventions are most useful and which populations would benefit most.

[Polypharmacy in nursing homes: options to improve drug therapy safety]

Patients in need of care usually suffer from multiple chronic conditions and therefore receive a high number of drugs. Polypharmacy involves multiple risks, for example, drug-drug and drug-disease interactions, adverse effects and potentially inappropriate medication (PIM), more hospital admissions, and increased mortality.Residents in long-term care facilities are particularly sensitive to adverse drug reactions because of age-related changes, frailty, and the high prevalence of dementia. Numerous drugs have side effects that lead to sedation, particularly in old age, and increase the risk of falls. In addition, anticholinergic effects negatively modify cognition. These PIMs are frequently prescribed to nursing home residents.The medication process in long-term care facilities is complex and requires numerous coordinated processes. In addition to the correct administration, the nursing staff have other important tasks such as monitoring the effects and potential adverse drug reactions and communicating their observations to the prescribing physicians and home-supplying pharmacists. The nursing staff therefore play a crucial role in the prescription of psychotropic drugs and contribute to the medication quality for nursing home residents. National and international studies indicate that improvements of polypharmacy and drug therapy safety in nursing homes can only be achieved by interprofessional collaboration.