The feasibility and effect of deprescribing in older adults on mortality and health: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of multidisciplinary interventions to address polypharmacy in community-dwelling older adults

Interventions to address polypharmacy in community-dwelling older adults often focus on medication-related outcomes. The aim was to explore the impact of multidisciplinary interventions to manage polypharmacy on clinical outcomes for community-dwelling older adults. This systematic review and meta-analysis included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on interventions by at least a pharmacist and a physician, indexed in MEDLINE, EMBASE or CENTRAL up to January 2023. Evidence certainty was assessed using the GRADE approach. Seventeen RCTs were included. Fifteen were rated as 'high' risk of bias. No relevant benefits were found in functional and cognitive status (primary outcomes), falls, mortality, quality of life, patient satisfaction, hospital admissions, emergency department or primary care visits. Interventions reduced medication costs, improved medication appropriateness (odds ratio [OR] 0.39), reduced number of medications (mean difference [MD] -0.57), resolved medication-related problems (MD -0.45), and improved medication adherence (relative risk [RR] 1.14). There was a low or very low certainty of the evidence for most outcomes. Multidisciplinary interventions to address polypharmacy appear effective in improving multiple dimensions of medication use. However, evidence for corresponding improvements in functional or cognitive status is scarce. New efficient models of multidisciplinary interventions to address polypharmacy impacting clinical outcomes should be explored.

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.

Reducing the drug burden of sedative and anticholinergic medications in older adults: a scoping review of explicit decision criteria

OBJECTIVES

To describe the extent, characteristics, and knowledge gaps regarding explicit decision criteria for deprescribing drugs with anticholinergic or sedative properties (Ach/Sed) in older adults.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Original studies, clinical trial protocols, grey literature, and Summaries of Product Characteristics.

METHODS

Searches targeting explicit decision criteria for deprescribing Ach/Sed were performed across MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science, including trial registries (clinicaltrials.gov, ICTRP, EU-CTR, ANZCTR) for pertinent articles, study protocols. Additionally, to encompass non-traditional or 'grey literature' sources, Google searches and relevant agency websites were explored, alongside the summary of product characteristics for Ach/Sed.

RESULTS

The initial literature search identified 8,192 unique data sources. After review, 188 original articles or books, 79 internet sources, and 127 SmPCs were included. Examining these sources for explicit criteria for 154 Ach/Sed, overall, 1,271 explicit criteria guidance for identifying clinical scenarios warranting deprescription of Ach/Sed across 145/154 Ach/Sed were identified. These criteria were identified mainly from qualitative research and Summaries of Product Characteristics. Additionally, 455 criteria-based recommendations suggesting approaches for tapering implementation across 76/154 Ach/Sed were identified, mostly from sources classified as expert opinions. Significant heterogeneity was found across the approaches for tapering Ach/Sed.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review provides a comprehensive overview of the literature providing guidance for clinical scenarios where Ach/Sed should be deprescribed and highlights the existing knowledge gaps regarding comprehensive guidance on tapering these drugs which warranties future research and development.

Polypharmacy and medication regimen complexity in transfusion-dependent thalassaemia patients: a cross- sectional study

BACKGROUND

Medication burden and complexity have been longstanding problems in chronically ill patients. However, more data are needed on the extent and impact of medication burden and complexity in the transfusion-dependent thalassaemia population.

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the characteristics of medication complexity and polypharmacy and determine their relationship with drug-related problems (DRP) and control of iron overload in transfusion-dependent thalassaemia patients.

METHOD

Data were derived from a cross-sectional observational study on characteristics of DRPs conducted at a Malaysian tertiary hospital. The medication regimen complexity index (MRCI) was determined using a validated tool, and polypharmacy was defined as the chronic use of five or more medications. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine the optimal cut-off value for MRCI, and logistic regression analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 200 adult patients. The MRCI cut-off point was proposed to be 17.5 (Area Under Curve  =  0.722; sensitivity of 73.3% and specificity of 62.0%). Approximately 73% and 64.5% of the patients had polypharmacy and high MRCI, respectively. Findings indicated that DRP was a full mediator in the association between MRCI and iron overload.

CONCLUSION

Transfusion-dependent thalassaemia patients have high MRCI and suboptimal control of iron overload conditions in the presence of DRPs. Thus, future interventions should consider MRCI and DRP as factors in serum iron control.

Clinical impact of medication review and deprescribing in older inpatients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy is a primary risk factor for the prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), drug-drug interactions (DDIs), and ultimately, adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Medication review and deprescribing represent effective strategies to simplify therapeutic regimens, minimize risks, and reduce PIM prescriptions. This systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental and observational studies aimed to evaluate the impact of different medication review and deprescribing interventions in hospitalized older patients.

METHODS

Experimental and observational prospective cohort studies evaluating the clinical effects of medication review and deprescribing strategies in older hospitalized patients were searched in the bibliographic databases, PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, from inception until January 8, 2024. A narrative synthesis of the results was provided, along with a meta-analysis of dichotomous data (i.e., re-hospitalizations and mortality).

RESULTS

Overall, 21 randomized controlled trials, 7 non-randomized interventional studies, and 2 prospective cohort studies were included in the systematic review. Of these, 14 (46.7%) assessed medication appropriateness as the primary outcome, while the remaining evaluated clinical outcomes (e.g., length of hospital stay, hospital readmissions, emergency department visits, and incidence of ADRs) and/or quality of life. The meta-analysis revealed a slight but statistically significant 8% reduction in hospital readmissions (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.85-0.99) following medication review and deprescribing, but no significant impact on mortality (HR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.96-1.00). Of the 30 included studies, 21 were considered at high risk of bias, mostly due to potential deviations from intended interventions and randomization processes. The remaining nine studies had "some concerns" (eight studies) or were considered at "low" risk of bias (one study).

CONCLUSION

Medication review and deprescribing are associated with potential benefits in reducing hospital readmission rates among hospitalized older patients, particularly through the reduction of PIM prescriptions. The integration of thorough medication review and deprescribing protocols in hospital settings may improve post-discharge outcomes and reduce overall healthcare costs.

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.

Implementation of a Pharmacist-Driven Aspirin Deprescribing Protocol Among Older Veterans in a Primary Care Setting

Background Recent cardiovascular guideline updates recommend against the use of aspirin for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in older people. However, aspirin use remains common in this population. Objective To implement and evaluate the benefit of a pharmacist-driven aspirin deprescribing protocol compared with primary care provider (PCP) education-only in a primary care setting. Methods This prospective, cohort project targeted deprescribing for patients prescribed aspirin for primary prevention of ASCVD. Patients were included if they received primary care services at the Milwaukee Veterans Health Administration Medical Center (VHA) and were 70 years of age or older. Criteria for exclusion were aspirin obtained outside the VHA system, aspirin prescribed for a non-ASCVD-related condition, and/or a history of ASCVD. Active deprescribing by pharmacists and PCP education took place in the intervention group with PCP education only in the standard-of-care group. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had aspirin deprescribed in each group. Secondary outcomes included patient acceptability of the intervention and barriers to implementation. Results A total of 520 patients were prescribed aspirin in the intervention group versus 417 in the education-only group. Sixty-five patients met intervention criteria and were contacted for aspirin deprescribing. The pharmacist-led active deprescribing group led to a higher rate of aspirin deprescriptions versus the education-only group (54% vs 18%; P = 0.0001) for patients who met criteria. Conclusion A pharmacist-led aspirin deprescribing protocol within a primary care setting significantly decreased the number of aspirin prescriptions compared with PCP education only.

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.

Considerations, barriers and enablers of deprescribing among healthcare professionals in Ogun State, Southwest, Nigeria: a cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Deprescribing is a clinical intervention aimed at managing polypharmacy and improving older adults' health outcomes. However, evidence suggests that healthcare professionals (HCPs) may face challenges in implementing the intervention. This study aimed to explore the considerations, barriers and enablers of deprescribing among HCPs in Southwest Nigeria.

METHODS

A quantitative cross-sectional survey was carried out among consecutively sampled HCPs including physicians, pharmacists and nurses in two public tertiary healthcare hospitals in Ogun State, Southwest, Nigeria. A structured 43-item self-administered questionnaire was used to explore the participants' sociodemographics, HCPs' experience, considerations, barriers and enablers of deprescribing in older adults. The data were summarised using descriptive statistics including frequency and percentage. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to determine differences in perceptions among the groups on a Likert scale. A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Overall, 453 copies of the questionnaire were analysed. Of the participants 204 (45.0%) were within the age group of 20-30 years; 173 (38.2%) claimed that older adults occasionally requested deprescribing of their medications. The majority (417; 92.1%) considered patients' quality of life to be very important in deprescribing; 423 (93.4%) opined that having a care goal known to members of the HCP team is an enabler for deprescribing while 308 (68.0%) disagreed or strongly disagreed that lack of incentives and remuneration for HCPs that de-prescribe is a barrier to deprescribing. There is a significant difference among the participants across professional groups on the assertion that pressure from pharmaceutical companies is a barrier to deprescribing in older adults (p = 0.037).

CONCLUSIONS

The participants in this study had various considerations for deprescribing medication in older adults including patients' quality of life. Having a care goal known to every HCP involved in managing a patient is an enabler for deprescribing while the lack of incentives and remuneration for HCPs that de-prescribe may not necessarily be a barrier to deprescribing. There is a need for regulations and policies to support the identified enablers among HCPs and reduce the barriers to effective deprescribing process.

Medication use quality and safety in older adults: 2022 update

Improving the quality of medication use and medication safety are important priorities for healthcare providers who care for older adults. The objective of this article was to identify four exemplary articles with this focus in 2022. We selected high-quality studies from an OVID search and hand searching of major high impact journals that advanced the field of research forward. The chosen articles cover domains related to deprescribing, medication safety, and optimizing medication use. The MedSafer Study, a cluster randomized clinical trial in Canada, evaluated whether patient specific deprescribing reports generated by electronic decision support software resulted in reduced adverse drug events in the 30 days post hospital discharge in older adults (domain: deprescribing). The second study, a retrospective cohort study using data from Premier Healthcare Database, examined in-hospital adverse clinical events associated with perioperative gabapentin use among older adults undergoing major surgery (domain: medication safety). The third study used an open-label parallel controlled trial in 39 Australian aged-care facilities to examine the effectiveness of a pharmacist-led intervention to reduce medication-induced deterioration and adverse reactions (domain: optimizing medication use). Lastly, the fourth study engaged experts in a Delphi method process to develop a consensus list of clinically important prescribing cascades that adversely affect older persons' health to aid clinicians to identify, prevent, and manage prescribing cascades (domain: optimizing medication use). Collectively, this review succinctly highlights pertinent topics related to promoting safe use of medications and promotes awareness of optimizing older adults' medication regimens.

Influence of chronic medical conditions on older patients' willingness to deprescribe medications: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Aging correlates with a heightened prevalence of chronic diseases, resulting in multimorbidity affecting 60% of those aged 65 or older. Multimorbidity often leads to polypharmacy, elevating the risk of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use and adverse health outcomes. To address these issues, deprescribing has emerged as a patient-centered approach that considers patients' beliefs and attitudes toward medication and reduces inappropriate polypharmacy in older adults. Our study aims to investigate whether certain chronic medical conditions are associated with older patients' willingness to deprescribe medications.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study enrolled 192 community-dwelling individuals aged 65 or older taking at least one regular medication. Data included demographics, clinical characteristics, and responses to the Portuguese revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire. Descriptive statistics characterized participants, while multiple binary logistic regression identified associations between chronic medical conditions and willingness to deprescribe.

RESULTS

Among the participants (median age: 72 years, 65.6% female), 91.6% had multimorbidity. The analysis revealed that willingness to deprescribe significantly increased with the presence of gastric disease (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 4.123; 95% CI 1.221, 13.915) and age (aOR = 1.121; 95% CI 1.009, 1.246). Conversely, prostatic pathology (aOR = 0.266; 95% CI 0.077, 0.916), higher scores in the rPATD appropriateness factor (aOR = 0.384; 95% CI 0.190, 0.773), and rPATD concerns about stopping factor (aOR = 0.450; 95% CI 0.229, 0.883) diminished patients' willingness to deprescribe.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the intricate relationship between older patients' attitudes toward deprescribing and chronic medical conditions. We found that gastric disease was associated with an increased willingness to deprescribe medications, while prostate disease was associated with the opposite effect. Future research should explore how patients with specific diseases or groups of diseases perceive deprescribing of medications general and for specific medications, aiding in the development of targeted interventions.

Assessing deprescribing tools for implementation in care homes: A qualitative study of the views of care home staff

BACKGROUND

Care home residents often experience polypharmacy (defined as taking five or more regular medicines). Therefore, we need to ensure that residents only take the medications that are appropriate or provide value (also known as medicines optimisation). To achieve this, deprescribing, or the reduction or stopping of prescription medicines that may no longer be providing benefit, can help manage polypharmacy and improve outcomes. Various tools, guides, and approaches have been developed to help support health professionals to deprescribe in regular practice. Little evaluation of these tools has been conducted and no work has been done in the care home setting.

OBJECTIVE

This qualitative study aimed to assess distinct types of deprescribing tools for acceptability, feasibility, and suitability for the care home setting.

METHODS

Cognitive (think-aloud) interviews with care home staff in England were conducted (from December 2021 to June 2022) to assess five different deprescribing tools. The tools included a general deprescribing guidance, a generic (non-drug specific) deprescribing framework, a drug-specific deprescribing guideline/guide, a tool for identifying potentially inappropriate medications, and an electronic clinical decision support tool. Participants were recruited via their participation in another deprescribing study. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research informed the data collection and analysis.

RESULTS

Eight care home staff from 7 different care homes were interviewed. The five deprescribing tools were reviewed and assessed as not acceptable, feasible, or suitable for the care home setting. All would require significant modifications for use in the care home setting (e.g., language, design, and its function or use with different stakeholders).

CONCLUSIONS

As none of the tools were deemed acceptable, feasible, and suitable, future work is warranted to develop and tailor deprescribing tools for the care home setting, considering its specific context and users. Deprescribing implemented safely and successfully in care homes can benefit residents and the wider health economy.

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.

Are Saudi Arabian Patients Willing to Be Deprescribed Their Medications? An Exploratory Study

Purpose

Deprescribing is a complex process that requires active patient involvement, so the patient's attitude to deprescribing is crucial to its success. This study aimed to assess predictors of Saudi Arabian patients' willingness to deprescribe.

Patients and Methods

In this cross-sectional study, adult patients from two hospitals in Riyadh completed a self-administered questionnaire gathering data on demographic information and the Arabic revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questions. Descriptive analysis and binary logistic regression were used to analyze the data.

Results

A total of 242 patients were included (mean age 59.8 (SD 11.05) years, range 25-87 years; 40% 60-69 years; 54.1% female). The majority (90%) of participants were willing to have medications deprescribed. Willingness to deprescribe was significantly associated with the rPATD involvement factor (OR=1.866, 95% CI 1.177-2.958, p=0.008) and the patient's perception of their health status (OR=2.08, CI=1.058-4.119, p=0.034).

Conclusion

The majority of patients were willing to have one or more medications deprescribed if recommended by their doctors. Patient perceptions about their own health and their involvement in deprescribing were important predictive factors that could shape counseling and education strategies to encourage deprescribing.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a collaborative deprescribing intervention of proton-pump-inhibitors on community-dwelling older adults: Protocol for the C-SENIoR, a pragmatic non-randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Worldwide, demographic ageing is a major social, economic and health challenge. Despite the increase in life expectancy, elderly often live with multiple chronic conditions, exposing them to multiple medications. Concerns have been raised about the growing issue of inappropriate long-term usage of proton-pump inhibitors (PPI), which have been associated with adverse outcomes and increased healthcare costs. Deprescribing is a recommended intervention to reduce or withdraw medicines that might be causing harm or might no longer be of benefit. This protocol details a trial to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a collaborative deprescribing intervention of PPI among community-dwelling elderly, involving community pharmacists and general practitioners.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A pragmatic, multicentre, two-arm, non-randomised controlled trial of a structured PPI collaborative deprescribing intervention in the primary care setting with a 6-month follow-up will be conducted. Patients must be 65 years old or older, live in the community and have been using PPI for more than 8 weeks. We hypothesize that the intervention will reduce the PPI usage in the intervention group compared to the control group. The primary outcome is the successful discontinuation or dose decrease of any PPI, defined as a statistically significant absolute 20% reduction in medication use between the intervention and control groups at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. An economic evaluation will be conducted alongside the trial. This study was approved by the Ethics Research Committee of Nova Medical School, NOVA University of Lisbon and by the Ethics Committee from the Local Health Unit Alto Minho, Portugal.

DISCUSSION

This pragmatic trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a patient-centred collaborative deprescribing intervention in the community setting in Portugal. It will also inform improvements for the development of future multi-faceted interventions that aim to optimise medication for the community-dwelling elderly.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN 49637686.

Development of a multidisciplinary medication management program in nursing homes: protocol for a randomized controlled trial : Multidisciplinary medication management in nursing homes

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy and the use of potentially inappropriate medications are common among nursing home residents and are associated with negative outcomes. Although deprescribing has been proposed as a way to curtail these problems, the best way to implement multidisciplinary comprehensive medication review and deprescribing and its real impact in specific high-risk populations, such as nursing home residents, is still unclear. This multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial aims to assess the effects of a multidisciplinary mediation management program on medication use and health problems.

METHODS

A total of 1,672 residents aged ≥ 65 years from 22 nursing homes in South Korea who meet the targeted criteria, such as the use of ≥ 10 medications, are eligible to participate. The experimental group will receive a comprehensive medication review, deprescription, and multidisciplinary case conference with the help of platform. Outcomes will be measured at baseline, at the end of the intervention, as well as at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after the end of the intervention. The primary endpoints will be the rate of adverse drug events, number of potentially inappropriate medications/potentially inappropriate medication users/two or more central nervous system drug/ central nervous system drug users, delirium, emergency department visits, hospitalization, and falls. The secondary endpoint will be the number of medications taken and polypharmacy users.

DISCUSSION

Our trial design is unique in that it aims to introduce a structured operationalized clinical program focused on reducing polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications in a nursing home setting with large samples.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Ethical approval was granted by the public institutional review board of the Ministry of Health and Welfare (2022-1092-009). The study is also registered with the Clinical Research Information Service (Identifier: KCT0008157, Development and evaluation of a multidisciplinary medication management program in long-term care facility residents Status: Approved First Submitted Date: 2023/01/18 Registered Date: 2023/02/03 Last Updated Date: 2023/01/18 (nih.go.kr) https://cris.nih.go.kr/ ), which includes all items from the World Health Organization Trial Registration Dataset.

Development and validation of the Medical Attitudes Towards Deprescribing Questionnaire

Polypharmacy and inappropriate prescriptions in the elderly are widely discussed themes in scientific literature. Although more and more studies showed the safety and feasibility of deprescribing strategies, these are not implemented in clinical practice. In order to measure the attitudes of Italian doctors towards deprescribing and address their awareness, experiences, difficulties in applying these strategies and potential suggestions, we aimed to develop and validate a questionnaire, the Medical Attitudes Towards Deprescribing Questionnaire (MATD-Q). Between November 2017 and October 2018 an e-mail was sent to internists, geriatricians and general practitioners, to invite them to connect to a platform and answer to the questionnaire, consisting in 38 items (with a five level score) and five questions. After 2-3 weeks, a second e-mail was sent for a second completion of the questionnaire. Test-retest reliability was assessed by means of the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The correlations between items were assessed by means of Pearson linear correlation coefficients and Cronbach Alpha was used to assess internal consistency. A total of 77 questionnaires completed twice were collected. By a principal component analysis we defined a smaller set of variables (n = 12), which resulted to be representative of the 38-item questionnaire.The final version of the questionnaire we developed (MATDQ-12), after validation in other cohorts, could be a useful tool to measure the efficacy of educational interventions aimed at improving the attitude of physicians towards deprescribing strategies with the final goal to allow their implementation in clinical practice.

Decreasing polypharmacy in older adults with cancer: A pilot cluster-randomized trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Polypharmacy is prevalent in older adults with cancer and associated with multiple adverse outcomes. A single-site, cluster-randomized clinical trial will enroll older adults with cancer and polypharmacy starting chemotherapy and will assess the effectiveness and feasibility of deprescribing interventions by comparing two arms: a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention and a patient educational brochure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study will be conducted in two phases. In phase I, focus groups and semi-structured individual interviews will guide adaptation of deprescribing interventions for the oncology clinic (phase Ia), and eight patients will undergo the pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention with iterative adaptations (phase Ib). In phase II, a pilot cluster-randomized trial (n = 72) will compare a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention with a patient education brochure, with treating oncologists as the cluster. Both efficacy (relative dose intensity of planned chemotherapy, potentially inappropriate medications successfully deprescribed, chemotherapy toxicity, functional status, hospitalizations, falls, and symptoms) and implementation outcomes (barriers and facilitators) will be assessed.

DISCUSSION

This study is anticipated to provide pilot data to inform a nationwide randomized clinical trial of deprescribing in older adults starting cancer treatment. The cluster randomization is intended to provide an initial estimate for the intervention effect as well as oncologists' intra-class correlation coefficient. Deprescribing interventions may improve outcomes in older adults starting cancer treatment, but these interventions are understudied in this population, and it is unknown how best to implement them into oncology practice. The results of this trial will inform the design of large, randomized phase III trials of deprescribing.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov Identifier:NCT05046171. Date of registration: September 16, 2021.

Efficacy of deprescribing on health outcomes: An umbrella review of systematic reviews with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Deprescribing is an important intervention across different settings in medicine, but the literature supporting such a practice is still conflicting. Therefore, we aimed to capture the breadth of outcomes reported and assess the strength of evidence of the use of deprescribing for health outcomes.

METHODS

Umbrella review of systematic reviews of the use of deprescribing searching in Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science until 01 November 2023. The grading of evidence was carried out using the GRADE for intervention studies, whilst data regarding systematic reviews were reported as narrative findings.

RESULTS

Among 456 papers, 12 systematic reviews (six with meta-analysis) for a total of 231 RCTs and 44,193 patients were included. In any setting, deprescribing was able to significantly reduce the number of total and of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in older patients (low certainty of evidence) and to reduce the proportion of participants potentially having several or PIMs (moderate certainty of evidence). In community, supported by a high certainty of evidence, deprescribing was not more effective than standard care in decreasing injurious falls, any falls or number of fallers. In nursing home, deprescribing was associated with a significantly lower PIMs than standard care (very low certainty of evidence). In end-of-life situations, deprescribing significantly reduced mortality rate of approximately 41% (high certainty of evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

Deprescribing is a promising intervention across different settings and situations, but a notable gap in the literature concerning its effects on substantial outcomes still exists.

Cost-Consequence Analysis of Deprescribing to Optimize Health Outcomes for Frail Older People: A Within-Trial Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The structured, clinically supervised withdrawal of medicines, known as deprescribing, is one strategy to address inappropriate polypharmacy. This study aimed to evaluate the costs and consequences of deprescribing in frail older people living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) in Australia.

DESIGN

A within-trial cost-consequence analysis of a deprescribing intervention-Opti-Med. The Opti-Med double-blind randomized controlled trial of deprescribing included 3 groups: blinded control, blinded intervention, and an open intervention group.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Seventeen RACFs in Western Australia and New South Wales. Participants were 303 older people living in participating RACFs from March 2014 to February 2019.

METHODS

Analysis was conducted from the health sector perspective. Health economic outcomes assessed include cost saved from deprescribed medicines and the incremental quality-adjusted life-years. Costs were presented in 2022 Australian dollars.

RESULTS

The total cost of the Opti-Med intervention was $239.13 per participant. The costs saved through deprescribed medicines over 12 months after adjusting for mortality within the trial period was $328.90 per participant in the blinded intervention group and $164.00 per participant in the open intervention group. On average, the cost of the intervention was more than offset by the cost saved from deprescribed medicines. Extrapolating these findings to the Australian population suggests a potential net cost saving of about $1 to $16 million per annum for the health system nationally. The incremental quality-adjusted life-years were very similar across the 3 groups within the trial period.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Deprescribing for frail older people living in RACFs can be a cost-saving intervention without reducing the quality of life. Systemwide implementation of deprescribing across RACFs in Australia has the potential to improve health care delivery through the cost savings, which could be reapplied to further optimize care within RACFs.

Outcomes of a Medication Optimization Virtual Interdisciplinary Geriatric Specialist (MOVING) Program: A Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug events among older adults result in significant mortality, morbidity and cost. This harm may be mitigated with appropriate prescribing and deprescribing. We sought to understand the prescribing outcomes of an interdisciplinary geriatric virtual consultation service.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, before-and-after feasibility study to measure prescribing outcomes for a medication optimization virtual interdisciplinary geriatric specialist (MOVING) programme comprised of expertise from geriatric clinical pharmacology, pharmacy and psychiatry for older adults (aged ≥ 65 years) between June and December 2018, Ontario, Canada. The primary outcome was the number of distinct prescriptions and the presence of polypharmacy (defined as ≥ 4 medications) before and after the service. Secondary outcomes included the number of as needed and regularly administered prescriptions, number of potentially inappropriate prescriptions as defined by the Beers and STOPP criteria, and number of prescriptions for psychotropics, long-acting opioids and diabetic medications.

RESULTS

We studied 40 patients with a mean age of 80.6 [standard deviation (SD) 8.8] years who received a MOVING consult. We found no significant change in the mean total number of prescriptions per patient before (12.02, SD 5.83) and after the intervention (11.58, SD 5.28), with a mean difference of -0.45 [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.94 to 0.04; p = 0.07]. We found statistically significant decreases in as needed prescriptions (mean difference - 0.30, 95% CI - 0.45 to - 0.15; p<0.001), and potentially harmful medications as identified by the Beers (mean difference -1.25, 95% CI -2.00 to -0.50; p = 0.002) and STOPP (mean difference -1.65, 95% CI -2.33 to -0.97; p < 0.001) scores. Without including the cost savings from hospital diversion by a MOVING consult, the costs of a MOVING consult were $545.80-$629.80 per person, compared with the costs associated with traditional in-person consults involving similar specialist clinical services ($904.89-$1270.69 per person).

CONCLUSION

A MOVING model of care is associated with decreases in prescriptions for potentially inappropriate medications in older adults. These findings support further evaluation to ascertain health system impacts.

Antidepressant deprescribing: State of the art and recommendations-A literature overview

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, the consumption of antidepressants has arisen. However, deprescribing antidepressant therapy is very complicated. The aim of this study was to implement practical recommendations for the development of guidelines to be used for antidepressant deprescription in clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The literature search has been conducted on March 13, 2023, using Scopus and PubMed databases. The following search string has been used: "antidepressants AND (deprescribing OR deprescription)". All studies reporting a deprescribing intervention for antidepressant medication, regardless of the study design, have been included. Studies that did not report antidepressant drug deprescription interventions and non-English-language papers have been excluded.

RESULTS

From the literature search, a total of 230 articles have been extracted. Applying the exclusion criteria, 26 articles have been considered eligible. Most of the analyzed studies (16, 61%) have been carried out in the real world, 3 (11%) were RCTs, 5 (19%) were qualitative studies, in particular expert opinions, 1 (4%) was a literature review, and 1 (4%) was a post-trial observational follow-up of an RCT. In 8 out of 26 studies (31%), the analyzed antidepressants have been specified: 2 (8%) focused on anticholinergics, 2 (8%) on SSRIs, 3 (11%) on tricyclic antidepressants, and 1 (4%) on esketamine. Nineteen out of 26 studies (73%) did not stratify antidepressants by therapeutic class. The sample sizes analyzed in the studies ranged from a minimum of 4 patients to a maximum of 113,909, and 12 studies included geriatric age as an inclusion criterion. A patient's therapy review has been the main deprescribing intervention, and it has been identified in 14 (54%) articles. Interventions have been carried out by clinicians in 4 (15%) studies, general practitioners in 5 (19%) studies, nurses in 2 (8%) studies, pharmacists in 4 (15%) studies, multidisciplinary teams in 10 (38%) studies, and patients in 1 (4%) study.

CONCLUSIONS

From the literature review, it emerged that there is no clear evidence useful to support clinicians in antidepressant deprescribing interventions.

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.

Attitudes and barriers towards deprescribing in older patients experiencing polypharmacy: a narrative review

Polypharmacy, commonly defined as ≥5 medications, is a rising public health concern due to its many risks of harm. One commonly recommended strategy to address polypharmacy is medication reviews, with subsequent deprescription of inappropriate medications. In this review, we explore the intersection of older age, polypharmacy, and deprescribing in a contemporary context by appraising the published literature (2012-2022) to identify articles that included new primary data on deprescribing medications in patients aged ≥65 years currently taking ≥5 medications. We found 31 articles were found which describe the current perceptions of clinicians towards deprescribing, the identified barriers, key enabling factors, and future directions in approaching deprescribing. Currently, clinicians believe that deprescribing is a complex process, and despite the majority of clinicians reporting feeling comfortable in deprescribing, fewer engage with this process regularly. Common barriers cited include a lack of knowledge and training around the deprescribing process, a lack of time, a breakdown in communication, perceived 'abandonment of care', fear of adverse consequences, and resistance from patients and/or their carers. Common enabling factors of deprescribing include recognition of key opportunities to instigate this process, regular medication reviews, improving lines of communication, education of both patients and clinicians and a multidisciplinary approach towards patient care. Addressing polypharmacy requires a nuanced approach in a generally complex group of patients. Key strategies to reducing the risks of polypharmacy include education of patients and clinicians, in addition to improving communication between healthcare providers in a multidisciplinary approach.

How does deprescribing (not) reduce mortality? A review of a meta-analysis in community-dwelling older adults casts uncertainty over claimed benefits

Some meta-analyses suggest that deprescribing may reduce mortality. Our aim was to determine the underlying factors contributing to this observed reduction. We analysed data from 12 randomized controlled trials included in the latest meta-analysis on deprescribing in community-dwelling older adults. Our analysis focused on deprescribed medications and potential methodological concerns. Only a third (4/12) of the trials aimed to study mortality, and that too as a secondary outcome. Five trials reported a reduction in total medications, potentially inappropriate medications or drug-related problems. Information on specific classes of deprescribed medications was limited, although a wide array was concerned (e.g., antihypertensive, sedative, gastro-intestinal medications and vitamins). Follow-up periods were ≤1 year in 11 trials, and five trials included ≤150 participants. Small sample sizes often resulted in imbalanced groups (e.g., comorbidities, number of potentially inappropriate medications), yet no trials presented multivariable analyses. In the two trials with the most weight in the meta-analysis, several deaths occurred before the intervention, making it difficult to draw conclusions about the impact of the deprescribing intervention on mortality. These methodological issues cast significant uncertainty on the benefits of deprescribing on mortality outcomes. Large-scale, well-designed trials are needed to address this issue effectively.

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.

Efficacy of a computer based discontinuation strategy to reduce PPI prescriptions: a multicenter cluster-randomized controlled trial

Deprescribing of inappropriate long-term proton pump inhibitors (PPI) is challenging and there is a lack of useful methods for general practitioners to tackle this. The objective of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of the electronic decision aid tool arriba-PPI on reduction of long-term PPI intake. Participants (64.5 ± 12.9 years; 54.4% women) with a PPI intake of at least 6 months were randomized to receive either consultation with arriba-PPI from their general practitioner (n = 1256) or treatment as usual (n = 1131). PPI prescriptions were monitored 6 months before, 6 and 12 months after study initiation. In 49.2% of the consultations with arriba-PPI, the general practitioners and their patients made the decision to reduce or discontinue PPI intake. At 6 months, there was a significant reduction by 22.3% (95% CI 18.55 to 25.98; p < 0.0001) of defined daily doses (DDD) of PPI. A reduction of 3.3% (95% CI - 7.18 to + 0.62) was observed in the control group. At 12 months, the reduction of DDD-PPI remained stable in intervention patients (+ 3.5%, 95% CI - 0.99 to + 8.03), whereas control patients showed a reduction of DDD-PPI (- 10.2%, 95% CI - 6.01 to - 14.33). Consultation with arriba-PPI led to reduced prescription rates of PPI in primary care practices. Arriba-PPI can be a helpful tool for general practitioners to start a conversation with their patients about risks of long-term PPI intake, reduction or deprescribing unnecessary PPI medication.

Deprescribing in cardiometabolic conditions in older patients: a systematic review

We conduct a systematic review to investigate current deprescribing practices and evaluate outcomes and adverse events with deprescribing of preventive medications in older patients with either an end-of-life designation or residing in long-term care facilities with cardiometabolic conditions. Studies were identified using a literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, clinicaltrials.gov.uk, CINAHLS, and the Cochrane Register from inception to March 2022. Studies reviewed included observational studies and randomised control trials (RCTs). Data was extracted on baseline characteristics, deprescribing rates, adverse events and outcomes, and quality of life indicators, and was discussed using a narrative approach. Thirteen studies were identified for inclusion. Deprescribing approaches included complete withdrawal, dose reduction or tapering, or switching to an alternative medication, for at least one preventive medication. Deprescribing success rates ranged from 27 to 94.7%. The studies reported no significant changes in laboratory values or adverse outcomes but did find mixed outcomes for hospitalisations and a slight increase in mortality rates when comparing the intervention and control groups. Lack of good-quality randomised control trials suggests that deprescribing in the older population residing in long-term care facilities with cardiometabolic conditions and multimorbidity is feasible when controlled and regularly monitored by an appropriate healthcare clinician, and that the benefits outweigh the potential harm in this cohort of patients. Due to the limited evidence and the heterogeneity of studies, a meta-analysis was not performed and as such further research is required to assess the benefits of deprescribing in this patient population. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42021291061.

Reasons why older adults in three countries agreed with a deprescribing recommendation in a hypothetical vignette

The purpose of this study was to examine factors important to older adults who agreed with a deprescribing recommendation given by a general practitioner (GP) to a hypothetical patient experiencing polypharmacy. We conducted an online, vignette-based, experimental study in the United Kingdom, United States and Australia with participants ≥65 years. The primary outcome was an agreement with a deprescribing recommendation (6-point Likert scale; 1 = strongly disagree and 6 = strongly agree). We performed a content analysis of the free-text reasons provided by participants who agreed with deprescribing (score of 5 or 6). Among 2656 participants who agreed with deprescribing, approximately 53.7% shared a preference for following the GP's recommendation or considered the GP the expert. The medication was referred to as a reason for deprescribing by 35.6% of participants. Less common themes included personal experience with medicine (4.3%) and older age (4.0%). Older adults who agreed with deprescribing in a hypothetical vignette most frequently reported a desire to follow the recommendations given the GP's expertise. Future research should be conducted to help clinicians efficiently identify patients who have a strong desire to follow the doctor's recommendations related to deprescribing, as this may allow for a tailored, brief deprescribing conversation.

Optimizing pharmacotherapy and deprescribing strategies in older adults living with multimorbidity and polypharmacy: EuGMS SIG on pharmacology position paper

Inappropriate polypharmacy is highly prevalent among older adults and presents a significant healthcare concern. Conducting medication reviews and implementing deprescribing strategies in multimorbid older adults with polypharmacy are an inherently complex and challenging task. Recognizing this, the Special Interest Group on Pharmacology of the European Geriatric Medicine Society has compiled evidence on medication review and deprescribing in older adults and has formulated recommendations to enhance appropriate prescribing practices. The current evidence supports the need for a comprehensive and widespread transformation in education, guidelines, research, advocacy, and policy to improve the management of polypharmacy in older individuals. Furthermore, incorporating deprescribing as a routine aspect of care for the ageing population is crucial. We emphasize the importance of involving geriatricians and experts in geriatric pharmacology in driving, and actively participating in this transformative process. By doing so, we can work towards achieving optimal medication use and enhancing the well-being of older adults in the generations to come.

Predictors of older patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Deprescribing is a complex process requiring a patient-centred approach. One frequently expressed deprescribing barrier is patients' attitudes and beliefs towards deprescribing. This study aimed to identify the predictors of patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted with community-dwelling patients aged ≥65 who are taking at least one regular medication. Data collection included patients' demographic and clinical characteristics and the Portuguese revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were used to present the patients' characteristics. Multiple binary logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the predictors of the patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-two participants (median age 72 years; 65.6% female) were included. Most (83.33%) were willing to have medications deprescribed, and the predictors were age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.136; 95% CI 1.026, 1.258), female sex (aOR = 3.036; 95% CI 1.059, 8.708) and the rPATD concerns about stopping factor (aOR = 0.391; 95% CI 0.203, 0.754).

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients were willing to have their medications deprescribed if it is recommended by their doctors. Older age and female sex increased the odds of willingness to deprescribe; higher concerns about stopping medications decreased the odds. These findings suggest that addressing patients' concerns about stopping their medicines may contribute to deprescribing success.

Patient Perceptions of Opioids and Benzodiazepines and Attitudes Toward Deprescribing

BACKGROUND

Opioids and benzodiazepines (BZDs) pose a public health problem. Older adults are especially susceptible to adverse events from opioids and BZDs owing to an increased usage of opioids and BZDs, multiple comorbidities, and polypharmacy. Deprescribing is a possible, yet challenging, solution to reducing opioid and BZD use.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to explore older adult patients' knowledge of opioids and BZDs, perceived facilitators and barriers to deprescribing opioids and BZDs, and attitudes toward alternative treatments for opioids and BZDs.

METHODS

We conducted 11 semi-structured interviews with patients aged 65+ years with long-term opioid and/or BZD prescriptions. The interview guide was developed by an interprofessional team and focused on patients' knowledge of opioids and BZDs, perceived ability to reduce opioid or BZD use, and attitudes towards alternative treatments.

RESULTS

Three patients had taken opioids, either currently or in the past, three had taken BZDs, and five had taken both opioids and BZDs. Generally, knowledge of opioids and BZDs was variable among patients; yet facilitators and barriers to deprescribing both opioids and BZDs were consistent. Facilitators of deprescribing included patient-provider trust and slow tapering of medications, while barriers included concerns about re-emergence of symptoms and a lack of motivation, particularly if medications and symptoms were stable. Patients were generally unenthusiastic about pursuing alternative pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic alternatives to opioids and BZDs for symptom management.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that patients are open to deprescribing opioids and BZDs under certain circumstances, but overall remain hesitant with a lack of enthusiasm for alternative treatments. Future studies should focus on supportive approaches to alleviate older adults' deprescribing concerns.

Determinants of implementing deprescribing for older adults in English care homes: a qualitative interview study

OBJECTIVES

To explore the factors that may help or hinder deprescribing practice for older people within care homes.

DESIGN

Qualitative semistructured interviews using framework analysis informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

SETTING

Participants were recruited from two care home provider organisations (a smaller independently owned organisation and a large organisation) in England.

PARTICIPANTS

A sample of 23 care home staff, 8 residents, 4 family members and 1 general practitioner were associated with 15 care homes.

RESULTS

Participants discussed their experiences and perceptions of implementing deprescribing within care homes. Major themes of (1) deprescribing as a complex process and (2) internal and external contextual factors influencing deprescribing practice (such as beliefs, abilities and relationships) were interrelated and spanned several CFIR constructs and domains. The quality of local relationships with and support from healthcare professionals were considered more crucial factors than the type of care home management structure.

CONCLUSIONS

Several influencing social and contextual factors need to be considered for implementing deprescribing for older adults in care homes. Additional training, tools, support and opportunities need to be made available to care home staff, so they can feel confident and able to question or raise concerns about medicines with prescribers. Further work is warranted to design and adopt a deprescribing approach which addresses these determinants to ensure successful implementation.

Deprescribing Interventions for Older Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Deprescribing reduces polypharmacy in older adults. A thorough study of the effect of deprescribing interventions on clinical outcomes in older adults is presently lacking. As a result, we evaluated the impact of deprescribing on clinical outcomes in older patients.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched from the time of creation to March 2023.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Randomized controlled trial with participants at least 60 years old.

MEASURES

Mortality, falls (number of fallers), hospitalization rates, emergency department visits, medication adherence, HRQoL (health-regulated quality of life), incidence of ADR (adverse drug reactions), PIM (potentially inappropriate medication), and PPO (potentially prescription omission) were evaluated in the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 32 RCTs (18,670 patients) were included. Deprescribing interventions significantly reduced proportions of older adults with PIM, PPO, and the incidence of ADRs. The interventions group also improved medication compliance.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Compared to routine care, deprescribing interventions significantly improve clinical outcome indicators for older adults.

Tackling potentially inappropriate prescriptions in older adults: development of deprescribing criteria by consensus from experts in Colombia, Argentina, and Spain

BACKGROUND

Potentially inappropriate medication use is prevalent among older adults in primary care, leading to increased morbidity, adverse drug reactions, hospitalizations, and mortality. This study aimed to develop and validate a tool for identifying PIMs in older adults within the primary care setting. The tool is composed of a list of criteria and was created based on consensus among experts from three Spanish-speaking countries, including two from Latin America.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted to identify existing tools, and prescription patterns were evaluated in a cohort of 36,111 older adults. An electronic Delphi method, consisting of two rounds, was used to reach a formal expert consensus. The panel included 18 experts from Spain, Colombia, and Argentina. The content validity index, validity of each content item, and Kappa Fleiss statistical measure were used to establish reliability.

RESULTS

Round one did not yield a consensus, but a definitive consensus was reached in round two. The resulting tool consisted of a list of 5 general recommendations per disease, along with 33 criteria related to potential problems, recommendations, and alternative therapeutic options. The overall content validity of the tool was 0.87, with a Kappa value of 0.69 (95% CI 0.64-0.73; Substantial).

CONCLUSIONS

The developed criteria provide a novel list that allows for a comprehensive approach to pharmacotherapy in older adults, intending to reduce inappropriate medication use, ineffective treatments, prophylactic therapies, and treatments with an unfavorable risk-benefit ratio for the given condition. Further studies are necessary to evaluate the impact of these criteria on health outcomes.

Emotional barriers and facilitators of deprescribing for older adults with cancer and polypharmacy: a qualitative study

PURPOSE

To describe emotional barriers and facilitators to deprescribing (the planned reduction or discontinuation of medications) in older adults with cancer and polypharmacy.

METHODS

Virtual focus groups were conducted over Zoom with 5 key informant groups: oncologists, oncology nurses, primary care physicians, pharmacists, and patients. All groups were video- and audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Focus group transcripts were analyzed using inductive content analysis, and open coding was performed by two coders. A codebook was generated based on the initial round of open coding and updated throughout the analytic process. Codes and themes were discussed for each transcript until consensus was reached. Emotion coding (identifying text segments expressing emotion, naming the emotion, and assigning a label of positive or negative) was performed by both coders to validate the open coding findings.

RESULTS

All groups agreed that polypharmacy is a significant problem. For clinicians, emotional barriers to deprescribing include fear of moral judgment from patients and colleagues, frustration toward patients, and feelings of incompetence. Oncologists and patients expressed ambivalence about deprescribing due to role expectations that physicians "heal with med[ication]s." Emotional facilitators of deprescribing included the involvement of pharmacists, who were perceived to be neutral, discerning experts. Pharmacists described emotionally aware communication strategies when discussing deprescribing with other clinicians and expressed increased awareness of patient context.

CONCLUSION

Deprescribing can elicit strong and predominantly negative emotions among clinicians and patients which could inhibit deprescribing interventions. The involvement of pharmacists in deprescribing interventions could mitigate these emotional barriers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05046171 . Date of registration: September 16, 2021.

Impact of deprescribing intervention on potentially inappropriate medications and clinical outcomes among hospitalized older adults in Malaysia: a randomized controlled trial (REVMED RCT) protocol

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy and the use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are prevalent among older patients admitted to hospitals, posing a heightened risk of adverse drug events. This trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention in reducing medications, PIM and improving clinical outcomes, using the locally developed Malaysian Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing Screening tool in Older Adults (MALPIP).

METHODS

This is an 18-month cluster-randomized, open-label, parallel-arm controlled trial conducted at 14 public hospitals in the Perak state of Malaysia. Patients aged 60 and above, who have at least one medication and one comorbidity are eligible. A stratified-cluster randomization design is employed, with 7 hospitals assigned to the control arm and 7 hospitals assigned to the intervention arm. The MALPIP screening tool will be used in the intervention group to review the medications. If PIM is detected, the pharmacists will discuss with doctors and decide whether to stop or reduce the dose. The primary outcomes of this trial are the total number of medications and number of PIM. The secondary outcomes include fall, emergency department visits, readmissions, quality of life and mortality. Outcomes will be measured during enrolment, discharge, 6, 12, and 18 months.

DISCUSSION

This REVMED trial aims to test the hypothesis that a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention initiated in the hospital will reduce the total number of medications and PIM 18 months after hospital discharge, reducing fall, emergency department visits, readmissions, mortality and lead to improvement in quality of life. Trial findings will quantify the clinical outcomes associated with reducing medications and PIM for hospitalized older adults with polypharmacy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

This trial was prospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05875623) on the 25th of May 2023. NCT05875623 Clinicaltrials.gov URL: NCT05875623 registered on 25th July 2023.

To prescribe or not to prescribe? A review of the Prescribing Competencies Framework for dentistry

OBJECTIVES

Dentists in Australia are the second largest prescriber group, and are generally not formally taught how to prescribe. The objective of this review is to describe the Prescribing Competencies Framework and its relevance to dentistry.

DATA

The four-model stage of prescribing by Coombes and colleagues, and the seven competencies within the Prescribing Competencies Framework devised by the Australian National Prescribing Service MedicineWise, are discussed and applied to dentistry.

SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

Each of the seven competencies are analysed and detailed in the context of clinical dental practice. Competencies 1-5 describe the skillset and tasks required by dentists to safely prescribe, whereas Competencies 6 and 7 describe the clinical environment and recommended resources to support dentists to prescribe safely and effectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The Prescribing Competencies Framework provides an overview of safe and effective prescribing. Prescribing is a process, and a separate skillset to clinical dentistry. The process involves information gathering, clinical assessment, effective communication and review of the patient. Access to timely and appropriate resources and relevant electronic sources of health information for clinicians are important to provide the support required for better informed prescribing decisions. The framework describes a patient-centered prescribing process, and ultimately prescribing should be a shared decision between the dentist and the patient.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Safe and effective prescribing is an integral part of dentistry and dentists are the second largest prescriber group. However, dentists display high rates of inappropriate and unnecessary prescribing, and to minimise errors, the Prescribing Competencies Framework has been established. This article details how the Framework applies to clinical practice dentistry.

How to Deprescribe Potentially Inappropriate Medications During the Hospital-to-Home Transition: Stakeholder Perspectives on Essential Tasks

PURPOSE

Nearly all older patients receiving postacute home health care (HHC) use potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) that carry a risk of harm. Deprescribing can reduce and optimize the use of PIMs, yet it is often not conducted among HHC patients. The objective of this study was to gather perspectives from patient, practitioner, and HHC clinician stakeholders on tasks that are essential to postacute deprescribing in HHC.

METHODS

A total of 44 stakeholders, including 14 HHC patients, 15 practitioners (including 9 primary care physicians, 4 pharmacists, 1 hospitalist, and 1 nurse practitioner), and 15 HHC nurses, participated. The stakeholders were from 12 US states, including New York (n = 29), Colorado (n = 2), Connecticut (n = 1), Illinois (n = 2), Kansas (n = 2), Massachusetts (n = 1), Minnesota (n = 1), Mississippi (n = 1), Nebraska (n = 1), Ohio (n = 1), Tennessee (n = 1), and Texas (n = 2). First, individual interviews were conducted by experienced research staff via video conference or telephone. Second, the study team reviewed all interview transcripts and selected interview statements regarding stakeholders' suggestions for important tasks needed for postacute deprescribing in HHC. Third, concept mapping was conducted in which stakeholders sorted and rated selected interview statements regarding importance and feasibility. A content analysis was conducted of data collected in the individual interviews, and a mixed-method analysis was conducted of data collected in the concept mapping.

FINDINGS

Four essential tasks were identified for postacute deprescribing in HHC: (1) ongoing review and assessment of medication use, (2) patent-centered and individualized plan of deprescribing, (3) timely and efficient communication among members of the care team, and (4) continuous and tailored medication education to meet patient needs. Among these tasks, developing patient-centered deprescribing considerations was considered the most important and feasible, followed by medication education, review and assessment of medication use, and communication.

IMPLICATIONS

Deprescribing during the transition of care from hospital to home requires the following: continuous medication education for patients, families, and caregivers; ongoing review and assessment of medication use; patient-centered deprescribing considerations; and effective communication and collaboration among the primary care physician, HHC nurse, and pharmacist.

What makes a multidisciplinary medication review and deprescribing intervention for older people work well in primary care? A realist review and synthesis

BACKGROUND

A third of older people take five or more regular medications (polypharmacy). Conducting medication reviews in primary care is key to identify and reduce/ stop inappropriate medications (deprescribing). Recent recommendations for effective deprescribing include shared-decision making and a multidisciplinary approach. Our aim was to understand when, why, and how interventions for medication review and deprescribing in primary care involving multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) work (or do not work) for older people.

METHODS

A realist synthesis following the Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards guidelines was completed. A scoping literature review informed the generation of an initial programme theory. Systematic searches of different databases were conducted, and documents screened for eligibility, with data extracted based on a Context, Mechanisms, Outcome (CMO) configuration to develop further our programme theory. Documents were appraised based on assessments of relevance and rigour. A Stakeholder consultation with 26 primary care health care professionals (HCPs), 10 patients and three informal carers was conducted to test and refine the programme theory. Data synthesis was underpinned by Normalisation Process Theory to identify key mechanisms to enhance the implementation of MDT medication review and deprescribing in primary care.

FINDINGS

A total of 2821 abstracts and 175 full-text documents were assessed for eligibility, with 28 included. Analysis of documents alongside stakeholder consultation outlined 33 CMO configurations categorised under four themes: 1) HCPs roles, responsibilities and relationships; 2) HCPs training and education; 3) the format and process of the medication review 4) involvement and education of patients and informal carers. A number of key mechanisms were identified including clearly defined roles and good communication between MDT members, integration of pharmacists in the team, simulation-based training or team building training, targeting high-risk patients, using deprescribing tools and drawing on expertise of other HCPs (e.g., nurses and frailty practitioners), involving patents and carers in the process, starting with 'quick wins', offering deprescribing as 'drug holidays', and ensuring appropriate and tailored follow-up plans that allow continuity of care and management.

CONCLUSION

We identified key mechanisms that could inform the design of future interventions and services that successfully embed deprescribing in primary care.

Drugs and the elderly: A complex interaction

Although it can be difficult to define who should be considered an elderly person, the population aged 65 and over is experiencing the fastest demographic expansion and will represent almost one billion inhabitants of the 2030 World. Drug use increases dramatically with age and the elderly population is, by far, the highest consumer of medicines, up to 10 times more than younger adults. This consumption is in many aspects inappropriate, unjustified or sub-optimal and associated with a huge number of adverse reactions, admissions in emergency units and attributable deaths. A good part of which could be prevented if basic rules of good prescription and ad-hoc guidelines were systematically used. Even if older adults are more likely to present an adverse drug reaction, available data tend to support that the main risk factor of iatrogenesis in the elderly is the number of drugs used. Moreover, it is often irrelevant to transpose to this population the conclusions concerning the benefit-risk balance of drugs assessed in younger adults; similarly, approaches and programs classically used in pharmacovigilance and pharmacoepidemiology should be tailored to this specific population.

Theoretical Underpinnings of a Model to Reduce Polypharmacy and Its Negative Health Effects: Introducing the Team Approach to Polypharmacy Evaluation and Reduction (TAPER)

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy, particularly among older adults, is gaining recognition as an important risk to health. The harmful effects on health arise from disease-drug and drug-drug interactions, the cumulative burden of side effects from multiple medications and the burden to the patient. Single-disease clinical guidelines fail to consider the complex reality of optimising treatments for patients with multiple morbidities and medications. Efforts have been made to develop and implement interventions to reduce the risk of harmful effects, with some promising results. However, the theoretical basis (or pre-clinical work) that informed the development of these efforts, although likely undertaken, is unclear, difficult to find or inadequately described in publications. It is critical in interpreting effects and achieving effectiveness to understand the theoretical basis for such interventions.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective is to outline the theoretical underpinnings of the development of a new polypharmacy intervention: the Team Approach to Polypharmacy Evaluation and Reduction (TAPER).

METHODS

We examined deprescribing barriers at patient, provider, and system levels and mapped them to the chronic care model to understand the behavioural change requirements for a model to address polypharmacy.

RESULTS

Using the chronic care model framework for understanding the barriers, we developed a model for addressing polypharmacy.

CONCLUSIONS

We discuss how TAPER maps to address the specific patient-level, provider-level, and system-level barriers to deprescribing and aligns with three commonly used models and frameworks in medicine (the chronic care model, minimally disruptive medicine, the cumulative complexity model). We also describe how TAPER maps onto primary care principles, ultimately providing a description of the development of TAPER and a conceptualisation of the potential mechanisms by which TAPER reduces polypharmacy and its associated harms.

Managing medical and psychiatric multimorbidity in older patients

Aging increases susceptibility both to psychiatric and medical disorders through a variety of processes ranging from biochemical to pharmacologic to societal. Interactions between aging-related brain changes, emotional and psychological symptoms, and social factors contribute to multimorbidity - the presence of two or more chronic conditions in an individual - which requires a more patient-centered, holistic approach than used in traditional single-disease treatment guidelines. Optimal treatment of older adults with psychiatric and medical multimorbidity necessitates an appreciation and understanding of the links between biological, psychological, and social factors - including trauma and racism - that underlie physical and psychiatric multimorbidity in older adults, all of which are the topic of this review.

Deprescribing Anticholinergic and Sedative Drugs to Reduce Polypharmacy in Frail Older Adults Living in the Community: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy is associated with poor outcomes in older adults. Targeted deprescribing of anticholinergic and sedative medications may improve health outcomes for frail older adults. Our pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention was a pragmatic 2-arm randomized controlled trial stratified by frailty. We compared usual care (control) with the intervention of pharmacists providing deprescribing recommendations to general practitioners.

METHODS

Community-based older adults (≥65 years) from 2 New Zealand district health boards were recruited following a standardized interRAI needs assessment. The Drug Burden Index (DBI) was used to quantify the use of sedative and anticholinergic medications for each participant. The trial was stratified into low, medium, and high-frailty. We hypothesized that the intervention would increase the proportion of participants with a reduction in DBI ≥ 0.5 within 6 months.

RESULTS

Of 363 participants, 21 (12.7%) in the control group and 21 (12.2%) in the intervention group had a reduction in DBI ≥ 0.5. The difference in the proportion of -0.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -7.9% to 7.0%) provided no evidence of efficacy for the intervention. Similarly, there was no evidence to suggest the effectiveness of this intervention for participants of any frailty level.

CONCLUSION

Our pharmacist-led medication review of frail older participants did not reduce the anticholinergic/sedative load within 6 months. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown measures required modification of the intervention. Subgroup analyses pre- and post-lockdown showed no impact on outcomes. Reviewing this and other deprescribing trials through the lens of implementation science may aid an understanding of the contextual determinants preventing or enabling successful deprescribing implementation strategies.

Attitudes of Older Adult Patients and Caregivers Towards Deprescribing of Medications in Ethiopia

Background

Deprescribing is essential for reducing inappropriate medication use and polypharmacy. For a holistic approach, it is essential to know how older adult patients and their caregivers perceive deprescribing.

Objective

To assess the attitude of older adult patients and caregivers towards deprescribing medication at Ambo University Referral Hospital.

Methodology

Institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted using the revised Patients' Attitude Towards Deprescribing tool (rPATD). The data was analyzed using the SPSS-25 software. Backward linear regression and logistic regression were used to measure association between outcome and determinant variables. The two-sided P-value ≤0.05 with 95% confidence interval was utilized for reporting significant factors.

Results

One hundred fifty-six (81.3%) of the respondents (ie, 85.0% of older adult and 77.2% of caregivers) agreed to stop one or more of their regular medications if the physician said it was possible despite 98 (51.0%) of them (ie, 49.0% of older adult and 53.3% of caregivers) being satisfied with their/their care recipient's medications. On the overall aggregate mean score, the respondents had a neutral position (2.6-3.59) regarding the burden and concerns of stopping medications whereas the majority of them disagree (1.0-2.59) with the inappropriateness of the medication they were taking and agreed (3.6-5.0) with the need for their involvement in treatment decision making. Concerns about stopping medicine scores (AOR = 0.440, 95% CI = 0.262-0.741, P = 0.035) and perceived levels of medication inappropriateness (AOR = 0.653, 95% CI = 0.456-0.936, P = 0.020) was significantly associated with the willingness to discontinue and overall satisfaction with their medicine regimen respectively.

Conclusion

The majority of older adult patients and caregivers would like to deprescribe if the physicians recommended it. The perceived concerns of stopping and inappropriateness of the medicines were associated with the willingness to deprescribe and overall satisfaction with their medicine respectively. Healthcare providers should prompt the deprescribing process with older adult patients and caregivers by addressing their concerns about stopping medications.

Why do older adults decline participation in research? Results from two deprescribing clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Heterogenous older adult populations are underrepresented in clinical trials, and their participation is necessary for interventions that directly target them. The purpose of this study was to evaluate reasons why hospitalized older adults declined participation in two deprescribing clinical trials.

METHODS

We report enrollment data from two deprescribing trials, Shed-MEDS (non-Veterans) and VA DROP (Veterans). For both trials, inclusion criteria required participants to be hospitalized, age 50 or older, English-speaking, and taking five or more home medications. Eligible patients were approached for enrollment while hospitalized. When an eligible patient or surrogate declined participation, the reason(s) were recorded and subsequently analyzed inductively to develop themes, and a chi-square test was used for comparison (of themes between Veterans and non-Veterans).

RESULTS

Across both trials, 1226 patients (545 non-Veterans and 681 Veterans) declined enrollment and provided reasons, which were condensed into three themes: (1) feeling overwhelmed by their current health status, (2) lack of interest or mistrust of research, and (3) hesitancy to participate in a deprescribing study. A greater proportion of Veterans expressed a lack of interest or mistrust in research (42% vs 26%, chi-square value = 36.72, p < .001), whereas a greater proportion of non-Veterans expressed feeling overwhelmed by their current health status (54% vs 35%, chi-square value = 42.8 p < 0.001). Across both trials, similar proportion of patients expressed hesitancy to participate in a deprescribing study, with no significant difference between Veterans and non-Veterans (23% and 21%).

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the reasons older adults decline participation can inform future strategies to engage this multimorbid population.

Multidisciplinary DEprescribing review for Frail oldER adults in long-term care (DEFERAL): Implementation strategy design using behaviour science tools and stakeholder engagement

INTRODUCTION

Deprescribing is a strategy for reducing the use of potentially inappropriate medications for older adults. Limited evidence exists on the development of strategies to support healthcare professionals (HCPs) deprescribing for frail older adults in long-term care (LTC).

OBJECTIVE

To design an implementation strategy, informed by theory, behavioural science and consensus from HCPs, which facilitates deprescribing in LTC.

METHODS

This study was consisted of 3 phases. First, factors influencing deprescribing in LTC were mapped to behaviour change techniques (BCTs) using the Behaviour Change Wheel and two published BCT taxonomies. Second, a Delphi survey of purposively sampled HCPs (general practitioners, pharmacists, nurses, geriatricians and psychiatrists) was conducted to select feasible BCTs to support deprescribing. The Delphi consisted of two rounds. Using Delphi results and literature on BCTs used in effective deprescribing interventions, BCTs which could form an implementation strategy were shortlisted by the research team based on acceptability, practicability and effectiveness. Finally, a roundtable discussion was held with a purposeful, convenience sample of LTC general practitioners, pharmacists and nurses to prioritise factors influencing deprescribing and tailor the proposed strategies for LTC.

RESULTS

Factors influencing deprescribing in LTC were mapped to 34 BCTs. The Delphi survey was completed by 16 participants. Participants reached consensus that 26 BCTs were feasible. Following the research team assessment, 21 BCTs were included in the roundtable. The roundtable discussion identified lack of resources as the primary barrier to address. The agreed implementation strategy incorporated 11 BCTs and consisted of an education-enhanced 3-monthly multidisciplinary team deprescribing review, led by a nurse, conducted at the LTC site.

CONCLUSION

The deprescribing strategy incorporates HCPs' experiential understanding of the nuances of LTC and thus addresses systemic barriers to deprescribing in this context. The strategy designed addresses five determinants of behaviour to best support HCPs engaging with deprescribing.

Deprescribing to optimise health outcomes for frail older people: a double-blind placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial-outcomes of the Opti-med study

BACKGROUND

potentially harmful polypharmacy is very common in older people living in aged care facilities. To date, there have been no double-blind randomised controlled studies of deprescribing multiple medications.

METHODS

three-arm (open intervention, blinded intervention and blinded control) randomised controlled trial enrolling people aged over 65 years (n = 303, noting pre-specified recruitment target of n = 954) living in residential aged care facilities. The blinded groups had medications targeted for deprescribing encapsulated while the medicines were deprescribed (blind intervention) or continued (blind control). A third open intervention arm had unblinded deprescribing of targeted medications.

RESULTS

participants were 76% female with mean age 85.0 ± 7.5 years. Deprescribing was associated with a significant reduction in the total number of medicines used per participant over 12 months in both intervention groups (blind intervention group -2.7 medicines, 95% CI -3.5, -1.9, and open intervention group -2.3 medicines; 95% CI -3.1, -1.4) compared with the control group (-0.3, 95% CI -1.0, 0.4, P = 0.053). Deprescribing regular medicines was not associated with any significant increase in the number of 'when required' medicines administered. There were no significant differences in mortality in the blind intervention group (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.50, 1.73, P = 0.83) or the open intervention group (HR 1.47, 95% CI 0.83, 2.61, P = 0.19) compared to the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

deprescribing of two to three medicines per person was achieved with protocol-based deprescribing during this study. Pre-specified recruitment targets were not met, so the impact of deprescribing on survival and other clinical outcomes remains uncertain.

Perspectives on deprescribing in palliative care

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacotherapy plays a critical role in the delivery of high-quality palliative care, but the intersection of palliative care and deprescribing has received little attention.

AREAS COVERED

We conducted a scoping review of English language articles using PubMed to identify relevant publications between 1 January 2000 to 31 July 2022 using search terms of deprescribing, palliative care, end of life, and hospice. We summarize current definitions and developments in palliative care and deprescribing from both clinical and research perspectives. We highlight key challenges and outline proposed solutions and needed research.

EXPERT OPINION

The future of deprescribing in palliative care requires the development and adoption of individualized approaches to medication management, including a reconsidered approach to communication about deprescribing. Evidence from high-quality clinical outcomes studies is lacking, and the field needs new approaches to coordination of care delivery. This review article will be of interest to both clinical and research-based pharmacists, physicians, and nurses interested in improving care for patients with serious illness.