Impact of the Goal-directed Medication Review Electronic Decision Support System on Drug Burden Index: A cluster-randomised clinical trial in primary care

The Impact of Deprescribing Interventions on the Drug Burden Index and Other Outcomes: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

The Drug Burden Index (DBI) calculates a person's exposure to anticholinergic and sedative medications. We aimed to review randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of deprescribing interventions that reported the DBI as an outcome, their characteristics, effectiveness in reducing the DBI, and impact on other outcomes.

DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analysis.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

RCTs of deprescribing interventions where the DBI was measured as a primary or secondary outcome in humans within any setting were included.

METHODS

Electronic databases, citation indexes, and gray literature were searched from April 1, 2007, to September 1, 2023. Quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.

RESULTS

Of 1721 records identified, 9 met the inclusion criteria. Six interventions were delivered by pharmacists and 3 were delivered by pharmacists/nurses or pharmacists/geriatricians. All interventions required at least intermediate-level skills and involved multiple components and target groups. Studies were conducted in the community (n = 5), nursing homes (n = 2), and hospitals (n = 2). The mean or median age was ≥75 years and most participants were women in all studies. Most (n = 6) studies were underpowered. The follow-up period ranged from 3 to 12 months. Three studies reported a lower DBI in the intervention group compared with control: 1 pharmacist independent prescriber-delivered in nursing homes (adjusted rate ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.92), 1 pharmacist/nurse practitioner-delivered in hospital (adjusted mean difference (MD), -0.28; 95% CI, -0.51 to -0.04), and 1 geriatrician/pharmacist-delivered in hospital (MD, -0.28; 95% CI, -0.52 to -0.04). Meta-analysis showed no difference in the change in DBI between control and intervention groups in the community including nursing homes (MD, -0.03; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.01) or hospital setting (MD, -0.19; 95% CI, -0.45 to 0.06). Interventions had inconsistent effects on cognition and no effect on other reported outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

RCTs of deprescribing interventions had no significant impact on reducing DBI or improving outcomes. Further suitably powered studies are required.

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.

Older adults' adherence to medications and willingness to deprescribe: A substudy of a randomized clinical trial

Our study investigated the association between patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed and medication adherence. This longitudinal substudy of the 'Optimizing PharmacoTherapy In the Multimorbid Elderly in Primary CAre' (OPTICA) trial, a cluster randomized controlled trial, took place in Swiss primary care settings. Participants were aged ≥65 years and over, with ≥3 chronic conditions and ≥5 regular medications. At baseline, the 'revised Patient Attitudes Towards Deprescribing' (rPATD) questionnaire was measured. The A14-scale measured adherence (self-report) at the 12-month follow-up. Multilevel linear regression analyses adjusted for baseline variables were performed. Of the 298 participants, 45% were women, and the median age was 78. Participants reported a high level of adherence and willingness to have medications deprescribed. We did not find evidence for an association between patients' willingness to deprescribe and medication adherence. Further research is needed to explore the relationship between these concepts and to inform collaborative decisions about medicines in the context of polypharmacy.

Older adults' attitudes towards deprescribing and medication changes: a longitudinal sub-study of a cluster randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between older patients' willingness to have one or more medications deprescribed and: (1) change in medications, (2) change in the appropriateness of medications and (3) implementation of prescribing recommendations generated by the electronic decision support system tested in the 'Optimising PharmacoTherapy In the Multimorbid Elderly in Primary CAre' (OPTICA) trial.

DESIGN

A longitudinal sub-study of the OPTICA trial, a cluster randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Swiss primary care settings.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were aged ≥65 years, with ≥3 chronic conditions and ≥5 regular medications recruited from 43 general practitioner (GP) practices.

EXPOSURES

Patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed was assessed using three questions from the 'revised Patient Attitudes Towards Deprescribing' (rPATD) questionnaire and its concerns about stopping score.

MEASURES/ANALYSES

Medication-related outcomes were collected at 1 year follow-up. Aim 1 outcome: change in the number of long-term medications between baseline and 12 month follow-up. Aim 2 outcome: change in medication appropriateness (Medication Appropriateness Index). Aim 3 outcome: binary variable on whether any prescribing recommendation generated during the OPTICA medication review was implemented. We used multilevel linear regression analyses (aim 1 and aim 2) and multilevel logistic regression analyses (aim 3). Models were adjusted for sociodemographic variables and the clustering effect at GP level.

RESULTS

298 patients completed the rPATD, 45% were women and 78 years was the median age. A statistically significant association was found between the concerns about stopping score and the change in the number of medications over time (per 1-unit increase in the score the average number of medications use was 0.65 higher; 95% CI: 0.08 to 1.22). Other than that we did not find evidence for statistically significant associations between patients' agreement with deprescribing and medication-related outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not find evidence for an association between most measures of patient agreement with deprescribing and medication-related outcomes over 1 year.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03724539.

The outcomes of considering goals of care in medication reviews for older adults: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

This is a systematic review of prescribing, clinical, patient-reported, and health utilization outcomes of goal-directed medication reviews in older adults.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and CINAHL databases to identify studies examining outcomes of goal-directed medication reviews in humans, with mean/median age ≥ 60 years and in English.

RESULTS

Seventeen out of 743 articles identified were included. Whilst there were inconsistent findings regarding changes in the number of medications between groups or post-intervention in one group (n = 6 studies), studies found reductions in drug-related problems (n = 2) and potential to reduce anticholinergics and sedatives (n = 2). Two out of seven studies investigating clinical outcomes found improvements, such as reduced hospital readmissions and improved depression severity. One study found 75% of patients achieved ≥ 1 goals and another found 43% of goals were achieved at six months. Four out of five studies found significant improvements in patient-reported quality of life between groups (n = 2) or post-intervention in one group (n = 2). Both studies investigating cost-effectiveness reported the intervention was cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence of positive impact on medication rationalization, quality of life and cost-effectiveness, supporting goal-directed medication reviews. Larger, longitudinal studies, exploring patient-focused outcomes may provide further insights into the ongoing impact of goal-directed medication reviews.

[Safe discontinuation of psychotropic drugs in older people? : New evidence and practical approach]

BACKGROUND

Many older patients are permanently prescribed one or more psychotropic drugs for treatment of symptoms, such as behavioral and psychological symptoms in dementia, depressive symptoms, anxiety, and insomnia. They therefore contribute to the risk of polypharmacy. Recently, deprescribing studies have been published in order to clarify if inadequate medications can be safely discontinued. This mini-review summarizes the study results and derives practical recommendations for routine use.

METHOD

A literature search was carried out in PubMed for clinical studies on deprescribing in association with psychotropic substances.

RESULTS

After removal of duplications, 12 heterogeneous clinical studies were identified and reduction of psychotropic substances could be successfully achieved in 8 studies. In four of these studies psychological, behavioral and functional endpoints were reported. Criteria for successful deprescribing of sedatives were in particular motivation, information and sufficient cooperation of the patients and for antipsychotic drugs in people with dementia, the sustainable establishment of nonpharmaceutical treatment strategies. Deprescribing was not attempted in cases of a history of severe chronic mental illness and in cases of severe behavioral symptoms in dementia. Evidence for antidepressants was not sufficient to extract practical recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Safe deprescribing of antipsychotic drugs in patients with dementia is justified if non-pharmacological treatment options are sustainably implemented, and for sedative drugs in well-informed, highly motivated and cooperative patients.

Pharmacist-led medication review in a residential in-reach service leads to deprescribing

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of a pharmacist-led medication review on deprescribing medications in a Residential In-Reach (RIR) service which provides acute care substitution to residential aged care residents.

METHODS

A pre-post observational study was conducted. Patient characteristics and admission and discharge medications were collected over two 3-month phases before (prephase) and after (postphase) the introduction of a pharmacist who performed a comprehensive medication review and provided deprescribing recommendations. The Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions (STOPP) version 2 was used to identify potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). The Drug Burden Index (DBI) was used to measure cumulative anticholinergic and sedative medication burden. Outcome of deprescribing was measured by the reduction in the number of PIMs, DBI scores and proportion of polypharmacy from admission to discharge.

RESULTS

The prephase included 59 patients (mean age 87.3 years, 63% female), and the postphase included 88 patients (mean age 87.3 years, 63% female). There was a significant reduction in the mean number of PIMs (pre +0.05 ± 2.59 vs. post -0.78 ± 2.32, p = 0.04) and median DBI (pre -0.004 ± 0.17 vs. post -0.07 ± 0.2, p = 0.03) in postphase compared to prephase. The proportion of polypharmacy at discharge was reduced in the postphase (pre-100% vs. post-90%, p = 0.01). The most deprescribed PIMs as measured by STOPP in postphase were drugs without indication, cardiovascular system drugs and gastrointestinal system drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of a pharmacist-led medication review in RIR service was associated with a significant reduction in the mean number of PIMs, median DBI and polypharmacy. Future studies are needed to determine whether deprescription is sustained to examine correlations to long-term patient outcomes.

Effects of a clinical decision support system and patient portal for preventing medication-related falls in older fallers: Protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial with embedded process and economic evaluations (ADFICE_IT)

BACKGROUND

Falls are the leading cause of injury-related mortality and hospitalization among adults aged ≥ 65 years. An important modifiable fall-risk factor is use of fall-risk increasing drugs (FRIDs). However, deprescribing is not always attempted or performed successfully. The ADFICE_IT trial evaluates the combined use of a clinical decision support system (CDSS) and a patient portal for optimizing the deprescribing of FRIDs in older fallers. The intervention aims to optimize and enhance shared decision making (SDM) and consequently prevent injurious falls and reduce healthcare-related costs.

METHODS

A multicenter, cluster-randomized controlled trial with process evaluation will be conducted among hospitals in the Netherlands. We aim to include 856 individuals aged ≥ 65 years that visit the falls clinic due to a fall. The intervention comprises the combined use of a CDSS and a patient portal. The CDSS provides guideline-based advice with regard to deprescribing and an individual fall-risk estimation, as calculated by an embedded prediction model. The patient portal provides educational information and a summary of the patient's consultation. Hospitals in the control arm will provide care-as-usual. Fall-calendars will be used for measuring the time to first injurious fall (primary outcome) and secondary fall outcomes during one year. Other measurements will be conducted at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months and include quality of life, cost-effectiveness, feasibility, and shared decision-making measures. Data will be analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Difference in time to injurious fall between the intervention and control group will be analyzed using multilevel Cox regression.

DISCUSSION

The findings of this study will add valuable insights about how digital health informatics tools that target physicians and older adults can optimize deprescribing and support SDM. We expect the CDSS and patient portal to aid in deprescribing of FRIDs, resulting in a reduction in falls and related injuries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05449470 (7-7-2022).

Interventions for reducing anticholinergic medication burden in older adults-a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Anticholinergic medications block the neurotransmitter acetylcholine in the brain and peripheral nervous system. Many medications have anticholinergic properties, and the cumulative effect of these medications is termed anticholinergic burden. Increased anticholinergic burden can have short-term side effects such as dry mouth, blurred vision and urinary retention as well as long-term effects including dementia, worsening physical function and falls.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic review (SR) with meta-analysis (MA) looking at randomised controlled trials addressing interventions to reduce anticholinergic burden in older adults.

RESULTS

We identified seven papers suitable for inclusion in our SR and MA. Interventions included multi-disciplinary involvement in medication reviews and deprescribing of AC medications. Pooled data revealed no significant difference in outcomes between control and intervention group for falls (OR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.52-1.11, n = 647), cognition (mean difference = 1.54, 95% CI: -0.04 to 3.13, n = 405), anticholinergic burden (mean difference = 0.04, 95% CI: -0.11 to 0.18, n = 710) or quality of life (mean difference = 0.04, 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.12, n = 461).

DISCUSSION

Overall, there was no significant difference with interventions to reduce anticholinergic burden. As we did not see a significant change in anticholinergic burden scores following interventions, it is likely other outcomes would not change. Short follow-up time and lack of training and support surrounding successful deprescribing may have contributed.

Post Hoc Analyses of a Randomized Controlled Trial for the Effect of Pharmacist Deprescribing Intervention on the Anticholinergic Burden in Frail Community-Dwelling Older Adults

OBJECTIVES

Anticholinergic burden is detrimental to cognitive health. Multiple studies found that a high anticholinergic burden is associated with an increased risk for dementia, changes to the brain structure, function, and cognitive decline. We performed a post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled deprescribing trial. We compared the effect of the intervention on baseline anticholinergic burden across the treatment and control groups and the time of recruitment before and after a lockdown due to the COVID pandemic with subgroup analyses by baseline frailty index.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

We analyzed data from a de-prescribing trial of older adults (>65 years) previously conducted in New Zealand that was focused on reducing the Drug Burden Index (DBI).

METHODS

We used the anticholinergic cognitive burden (ACB) to quantify the impact of the intervention on reducing the anticholinergic burden. Participants not taking anticholinergics at the start of the trial were excluded. The primary outcome for this subgroup analysis was a change in ACB, measured with the ĝ_Hedges statistic describing the difference in standard deviation units of this change between intervention and control. For this analysis, the trial participants were stratified into low, medium, and high frailty and timing into prior- and post-lockdown (public health measures for COVID-19).

RESULTS

Among the 295 participants in this analysis, the median (IQR) age was 79 (74, 85), and 67% were women. For the primary outcome ĝ_Hedges = -0.04 (95% CI -0.26 to 0.19) with a -0.23 mean reduction in ACB in the intervention arm and -0.19 in the control arm. Before lockdown ĝ_Hedges = -0.38 (95% CI -0.84 to 0.04) and post-lockdown ĝ_Hedges = 0.07 (95% CI -0.19 to 0.33). The mean change in ACB for each of the frailty strata was as follows: low frailty (-0.02; 95% CI -0.65 to 0.18); medium frailty (0.05; 95% CI -0.28 to 0.38); high frailty (0.08; 95% CI -0.40 to 0.56).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The study did not provide evidence for the effect of pharmacist deprescribing intervention on reducing the anticholinergic burden. However, this post hoc analysis examined the impact of COVID on the effectiveness of the intervention, and further research in this area may be warranted.

[Safe discontinuation of psychotropic drugs in older people? : New evidence and practical approach]

BACKGROUND

Many older patients are permanently prescribed one or more psychotropic drugs for treatment of symptoms, such as behavioral and psychological symptoms in dementia, depressive symptoms, anxiety, and insomnia. They therefore contribute to the risk of polypharmacy. Recently, deprescribing studies have been published in order to clarify if inadequate medications can be safely discontinued. This mini-review summarizes the study results and derives practical recommendations for routine use.

METHOD

A literature search was carried out in PubMed for clinical studies on deprescribing in association with psychotropic substances.

RESULTS

After removal of duplications, 12 heterogeneous clinical studies were identified and reduction of psychotropic substances could be successfully achieved in 8 studies. In four of these studies psychological, behavioral and functional endpoints were reported. Criteria for successful deprescribing of sedatives were in particular motivation, information and sufficient cooperation of the patients and for antipsychotic drugs in people with dementia, the sustainable establishment of nonpharmaceutical treatment strategies. Deprescribing was not attempted in cases of a history of severe chronic mental illness and in cases of severe behavioral symptoms in dementia. Evidence for antidepressants was not sufficient to extract practical recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Safe deprescribing of antipsychotic drugs in patients with dementia is justified if non-pharmacological treatment options are sustainably implemented, and for sedative drugs in well-informed, highly motivated and cooperative patients.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DATA SOURCE

Published literature.

STUDY DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA EXTRACTION METHODS

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

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

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

OUTCOME ASSESSMENT

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Willingness of older people living with dementia and mild cognitive impairment and their caregivers to have medications deprescribed

BACKGROUND

people living with cognitive impairment commonly take multiple medications including potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), which puts them at risk of medication related harms.

AIMS

to explore willingness to have a medication deprescribed of older people living with cognitive impairment (dementia or mild cognitive impairment) and multiple chronic conditions and assess the relationship between willingness, patient characteristics and belief about medications.

METHODS

cross-sectional study using results from the revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing questionnaire (rPATDcog) collected as baseline data in the OPTIMIZE study, a pragmatic, cluster-randomised trial educating patients and clinicians about deprescribing. Eligible participants were 65+, diagnosed with dementia or mild cognitive impairment, and prescribed at least five-long-term medications.

RESULTS

the questionnaire was mailed to 1,409 intervention patients and 553 (39%) were returned and included in analysis. Participants had a mean age of 80.1 (SD 7.4) and 52.4% were female. About 78.5% (431/549) of participants said that they would be willing to have one of their medications stopped if their doctor said it was possible. Willingness to deprescribe was negatively associated with getting stressed when changes are made and with previously having a bad experience with stopping a medication (P < 0.001 for both).

CONCLUSION

most older people living with cognitive impairment are willing to deprescribe. Addressing previous bad experiences with stopping a medication and stress when changes are made to medications may be key points to discuss during deprescribing conversations.

Medication reviews and deprescribing as a single intervention in falls prevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

our aim was to assess the effectiveness of medication review and deprescribing interventions as a single intervention in falls prevention.

METHODS

DESIGN

systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO until 28 March 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

randomised controlled trials of older participants comparing any medication review or deprescribing intervention with usual care and reporting falls as an outcome.

STUDY RECORDS

title/abstract and full-text screening by two reviewers.

RISK OF BIAS

Cochrane Collaboration revised tool.

DATA SYNTHESIS

results reported separately for different settings and sufficiently comparable studies meta-analysed.

RESULTS

forty-nine heterogeneous studies were included.

COMMUNITY

meta-analyses of medication reviews resulted in a risk ratio (RR) of 1.05 (95% confidence interval, 0.85-1.29, I2 = 0%, 3 studies(s)) for number of fallers, in an RR = 0.95 (0.70-1.27, I2 = 37%, 3 s) for number of injurious fallers and in a rate ratio (RaR) of 0.89 (0.69-1.14, I2 = 0%, 2 s) for injurious falls.

HOSPITAL

meta-analyses assessing medication reviews resulted in an RR = 0.97 (0.74-1.28, I2 = 15%, 2 s) and in an RR = 0.50 (0.07-3.50, I2 = 72% %, 2 s) for number of fallers after and during admission, respectively.

LONG-TERM CARE

meta-analyses investigating medication reviews or deprescribing plans resulted in an RR = 0.86 (0.72-1.02, I2 = 0%, 5 s) for number of fallers and in an RaR = 0.93 (0.64-1.35, I2 = 92%, 7 s) for number of falls.

CONCLUSIONS

the heterogeneity of the interventions precluded us to estimate the exact effect of medication review and deprescribing as a single intervention. For future studies, more comparability is warranted. These interventions should not be implemented as a stand-alone strategy in falls prevention but included in multimodal strategies due to the multifactorial nature of falls.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020218231.

Implementation of pharmacist-led deprescribing in collaborative primary care settings

In many jurisdictions pharmacists share prescribing responsibilities with other members of the primary care team. Responsibility for deprescribing, the healthcare professional supervised withdrawal of medications that are no longer needed, has not been assumed by a specific member of the primary care team. In this commentary we describe implementation of pharmacist-led deprescribing in collaborative primary care settings using the seven components of knowledge translation. Patient and stakeholder engagement shaped the deprescribing intervention. The intervention was implemented in three collaborative primary care clinics in two Canadian provinces. The evaluation included measures of medication appropriateness, patient satisfaction, and healthcare professional satisfaction. Pharmacist-led deprescribing in primary care was acceptable to both patients and healthcare professionals and demonstrated a reduction of medications deemed to confer more risk than benefit. Our findings support successes in pharmacist-led deprescribing. Future work is needed to understand how to successfully implement and evaluate pharmacist-led deprescribing more widely.

How to Improve Healthcare for Patients with Multimorbidity and Polypharmacy in Primary Care: A Pragmatic Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial of the MULTIPAP Intervention

(1) Purpose: To investigate a complex MULTIPAP intervention that implements the Ariadne principles in a primary care population of young-elderly patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy and to evaluate its effectiveness for improving the appropriateness of prescriptions. (2) Methods: A pragmatic cluster-randomized clinical trial was conducted involving 38 family practices in Spain. Patients aged 65–74 years with multimorbidity and polypharmacy were recruited. Family physicians (FPs) were randomly allocated to continue usual care or to provide the MULTIPAP intervention based on the Ariadne principles with two components: FP training (eMULTIPAP) and FP patient interviews. The primary outcome was the appropriateness of prescribing, measured as the between-group difference in the mean Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) score change from the baseline to the 6-month follow-up. The secondary outcomes were quality of life (EQ-5D-5 L), patient perceptions of shared decision making (collaboRATE), use of health services, treatment adherence, and incidence of drug adverse events (all at 1 year), using multi-level regression models, with FP as a random effect. (3) Results: We recruited 117 FPs and 593 of their patients. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the between-group difference for the mean MAI score change after a 6-month follow-up was −2.42 (95% CI from −4.27 to −0.59) and, between baseline and a 12-month follow-up was −3.40 (95% CI from −5.45 to −1.34). There were no significant differences in any other secondary outcomes. (4) Conclusions: The MULTIPAP intervention improved medication appropriateness sustainably over the follow-up time. The small magnitude of the effect, however, advises caution in the interpretation of the results given the paucity of evidence for the clinical benefit of the observed change in the MAI. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02866799.

Development of an Electronic Tool to Assess Patient Preferences in Geriatric Polypharmacy (PolyPref)

PURPOSE

Medical decision-making in older adults with multiple chronic conditions and polypharmacy should include the individual patient's treatment preferences. We developed and pilot-tested an electronic instrument (PolyPref) to elicit patient preferences in geriatric polypharmacy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

PolyPref follows a two-stage direct approach to preference assessment. Stage 1 generates an individual preselection of relevant health outcomes and medication regimen characteristics, followed by stage 2, in which their importance is assessed using the Q-sort methodology. The feasibility of the instrument was tested in adults aged ≥70 years with ≥2 chronic conditions and regular intake of ≥5 medicines. After the assessment with PolyPref, the patients rated the tool with regard to its comprehensibility and usability and assessed the accuracy of the personal result. Evaluators rated the patients' understanding of the task.

RESULTS

Eighteen short-term health outcomes, 3 long-term health outcomes, and 8 medication regimen characteristics were included in the instrument. The final population for the pilot study comprised 15 inpatients at a clinic for geriatric rehabilitation with a mean age of 80.6 (± 6.0) years, a median score of 28 (range 25-30) points on the Mini-Mental State Examination, and a mean of 11.6 (± 3.6) regularly taken medicines. Feedback by the patients and the evaluators revealed ratings in favor of understanding and comprehensibility of 86.7% to 100%. The majority of the patients stated that their final result summarized the most important aspects of their pharmacotherapy (93.3%) and that its ranking order reflected their personal opinion (100%). Preference assessment took an average of 35 (± 8.5) min, with the instrument being handled by the evaluator in 14 of the 15 participants.

CONCLUSION

Preference assessment with PolyPref was feasible in older adults with multiple chronic conditions and polypharmacy, offering a new strategy for the standardized evaluation of patient priorities in geriatric pharmacotherapy.

Individualized versus Standardized Risk Assessment in Patients at High Risk for Adverse Drug Reactions (The IDrug Randomized Controlled Trial)-Never Change a Running System?

The aim of this study was to compare effects of an individualized with a standardized risk assessment for adverse drug reactions to improve drug treatment with antithrombotic drugs in older adults. A randomized controlled trial was conducted in general practitioner (GP) offices. Patients aged 60 years and older, multi-morbid, taking antithrombotic drugs and at least one additional drug continuously were randomized to individualized and standardized risk assessment groups. Patients were followed up for nine months. A composite endpoint defined as at least one bleeding, thromboembolic event or death reported via a trigger list was used. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. In total, N = 340 patients were enrolled from 43 GP offices. Patients in the individualized risk assessment group met the composite endpoint more often than in the standardized group (OR 1.63 [95%CI 1.02-2.63]) with multiple adjustments. The OR was higher in patients on phenprocoumon treatment (OR 1.99 [95%CI 1.05-3.76]), and not significant on DOAC treatment (OR 1.52 [95%CI 0.63-3.69]). Pharmacogenenetic variants of CYP2C9, 2C19 and VKORC1 were not observed to be associated with the composite endpoint. The results of this study may indicate that the time point for implementing individualized risk assessments is of importance.

Frailty Status and Cognitive Function Should Guide Prescribing in Long-term Care Facilities

Frailty, dementia and complex multimorbidity are highly prevalent among residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs). Prescribing for residents of LTCFs is often informed by disease-specific clinical practice guidelines based on research conducted among younger and more robust adults. However, frailty and cognitive impairment may modify medication benefits and risks. Residents with frailty and advanced dementia may be at increased susceptibility to adverse drug events (ADEs) and often have a lower likelihood of achieving long-term therapeutic benefit from chronic preventative medications. For this reason, there is a strong rationale for deprescribing, particularlyamong residents with high medication burdens, swallowing difficulties or limited dexterity. Conversely, frailty and dementia have also been associated with under-prescribing of clinically indicated medications. Unnecessarily withholding treatment based on assumed risk may deprive vulnerable population groups from receiving evidence-based care. There is a need for specific evidence regarding medication benefits and risks in LTCF residents with frailty and dementia. Observational studies conducted using routinely collected health data may complement evidence from randomized controlled trials that often exclude people living with dementia, frailty and in LTCFs. Balancing over- and under-prescribing requires consideration of each resident's frailty and cognitive status, therapeutic goals, time-to-benefit, potential ADEs, and individual values or preferences. Incorporating frailty screening into medication review may also provide better alignment of medication regimens to changing goals of care. Timely identification of frail residents as part of treatment decision-making may assist with targeting interventions to minimize and monitor for ADEs. Shifting away from rigid application of conventional disease-specific clinical practice guidelines may provide an individualized and more holistic assessment of medication benefits and risks in the LTCF setting.

Development, validation and evaluation of the Goal-directed Medication review Electronic Decision Support System (G-MEDSS)©

OBJECTIVES

1) To understand and investigate the experiences of accredited clinical pharmacists (ACP) using computerised clinical decision support systems (CCDSS) during medication reviews for older people, including those living with dementia; 2) To design, develop, validate, and evaluate a CCDSS that incorporates pharmacological and other deprescribing tools to aid person-centred management of high-risk medications in older adults living with and without dementia.

METHODS

This study consisted of three phases and was designed on scenario-based methodology: a) the development phase, which included an exploratory survey and prototype building; b) the validation phase, which included qualitative data collection and usability testing with ACPs, general practitioners (GPs) and carers for people living with dementia; and c) the evaluation phase, using mixed-methods analyses.

RESULTS

The exploratory survey found that ACPs required a flexible, and reliable CCDSS to support them with clinical decisions regarding high-risk medication use in older adults. The Goal-directed Medication review Electronic Decision Support System (G-MEDSS)© was developed and validated using quantitative and qualitative feedback received from ACPs, GPs and carers for people with dementia. The mean (SD) System Usability Scale score was 69.0 (12.9), which indicated fair-good usability.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Involving end-users in the design process refined and improved the design of G-MEDSS, allowing for a person-centred and goal-directed delivery of pharmaceutical care. G-MEDSS allows healthcare practitioners conducting medication reviews for older adults living with and without dementia to tailor pharmaceutical care to meet their goals and preferences. Future studies may explore integration of G-MEDSS with prescribing or dispensing software.

Consumer attitudes towards deprescribing: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Harmful and/or unnecessary medication use in older adults is common. This indicates deprescribing (supervised withdrawal of inappropriate medicines) is not happening as often as it should. This study aimed to synthesize the results of the Patients’ Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (PATD) questionnaire (and revised versions).

Methods

Databases were searched from January 2013 to March 2020. Google Scholar was used for citation searching of the development and validation manuscripts to identify original research using the validated PATD, revised PATD (older adult and caregiver versions), and the version for people with cognitive impairment (rPATDcog). Two authors extracted data independently. A meta-analysis of proportions (random-effects model) was conducted with subgroup meta-analyses for setting and population. The primary outcome was the question: “If my doctor said it was possible, I would be willing to stop one or more of my medicines.” Secondary outcomes were associations between participant characteristics and primary outcome and other (r)PATD results.

Results

We included 46 articles describing 40 studies (n = 10,816 participants). The meta-analysis found the proportion of participants who agreed or strongly agreed with this statement was 84% (95% CI 81%–88%) and 80% (95% CI 74%–86%) in patients and caregivers, respectively, with significant heterogeneity (I² = 95% and 77%).

Conclusion

Consumers reported willingness to have a medication deprescribed although results should be interpreted with caution due to heterogeneity. The findings from this study moves toward understanding attitudes toward deprescribing, which could increase the discussion and uptake of deprescribing recommendations in clinical practice.

An Update on Medication Use in Older Adults: a Narrative Review

Purpose of Review

The global phenomenon of population aging is impacting the health and care needs of society. The use of medications by older adults is acknowledged to be the most common form of medical intervention for many acute and chronic conditions and prescribing in this population continues to increase. In this narrative review, we summarise the age-related factors that should be considered when prescribing for older adults, address some of the perennial challenges related to medicine use in older people, and highlight important emerging research in this area.

Recent Findings

A range of age-related factors should be considered when prescribing for older adults. However, the evidence base still lacks data pertaining to older adults due to their continued under-representation in clinical trials. Multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and inappropriate prescribing continue to remain prevalent among older adults, although recent research has been focused on the development and evaluation of complex interventions to address these challenges.

Summary

Further high-quality studies of interventions to improve and support medication use in older adults are needed, ensuring that older adults are well represented in such trials and consideration is given to the measurement of patient- and provider-focused outcomes.

Baseline characteristics and comparability of older multimorbid patients with polypharmacy and general practitioners participating in a randomized controlled primary care trial

Objectives

Recruiting general practitioners (GPs) and their multimorbid older patients for trials is challenging for multiple reasons (e.g., high workload, limited mobility). The comparability of study participants is important for interpreting study findings. This manuscript describes the baseline characteristics of GPs and patients participating in the ‘Optimizing PharmacoTherapy in older multimorbid adults In primary CAre’ (OPTICA) trial, a study of optimization of pharmacotherapy for multimorbid older adults. The overall aim of this study was to determine if the GPs and patients participating in the OPTICA trial are comparable to the real-world population in Swiss primary care.

Design

Analysis of baseline data from GPs and patients in the OPTICA trial and a reference cohort from the FIRE (‘Family medicine ICPC Research using Electronic medical records’) project.

Setting

Primary care, Switzerland.

Participants

Three hundred twenty-three multimorbid (≥ 3 chronic conditions) patients with polypharmacy (≥ 5 regular medications) aged ≥ 65 years and 43 GPs recruited for the OPTICA trial were compared to 22,907 older multimorbid patients with polypharmacy and 227 GPs from the FIRE database.

Methods

We compared the characteristics of GPs and patients participating in the OPTICA trial with other GPs and other older multimorbid adults with polypharmacy in the FIRE database. We described the baseline willingness to have medications deprescribed of the patients participating in the OPTICA trial using the revised Patients’ Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire.

Results

The GPs in the FIRE project and OPTICA were similar in terms of sociodemographic characteristics and their work as a GP (e.g. aged in their fifties, ≥ 10 years of experience, ≥ 60% are self-employed, ≥ 80% work in a group practice). The median age of patients in the OPTICA trial was 77 years and 45% of trial participants were women. Patients participating in the OPTICA trial and patients in the FIRE database were comparable in terms of age, certain clinical characteristics (e.g. systolic blood pressure, body mass index) and health services use (e.g. selected lab and vital data measurements). More than 80% of older multimorbid patients reported to be willing to stop ≥ 1 of their medications if their doctor said that this would be possible.

Conclusion

The characteristics of patients and GPs recruited into the OPTICA trial are relatively comparable to characteristics of a real-world Swiss population, which indicates that recruiting a generalizable patient sample is possible in the primary care setting. Multimorbid patients in the OPTICA trial reported a high willingness to have medications deprescribed.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03724539), KOFAM (Swiss national portal) (SNCTP000003060), Universal Trial Number (U1111-1226-8013)

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01488-8.