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

Adopting STOPP/START Criteria Version 3 in Clinical Practice: A Q&A Guide for Healthcare Professionals

The growing complexity of geriatric pharmacotherapy necessitates effective tools for mitigating the risks associated with polypharmacy. The Screening Tool of Older Persons' Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP)/Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (START) criteria have been instrumental in optimizing medication management among older adults. Despite their large adoption for improving the reduction of potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) and patient outcomes, the implementation of STOPP/START criteria faces notable challenges. The extensive number of criteria in the latest version and time constraints in primary care pose practical difficulties, particularly in settings with a high number of older patients. This paper critically evaluates the challenges and evolving implications of applying the third version of the STOPP/START criteria across various clinical settings, focusing on the European healthcare context. Utilizing a "Questions & Answers" format, it examines the criteria's implementation and discusses relevant suitability and potential adaptations to address the diverse needs of different clinical environments. By emphasizing these aspects, this paper aims to contribute to the ongoing discourse on enhancing medication safety and efficacy in the geriatric population, and to promote more person-centred care in an aging society.

Improving the feasibility of deprescribing proton pump inhibitors: GPs' insights on barriers, facilitators, and strategies

Introduction

The prevalent overprescribing of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) poses health risks from prolonged use. GPs play a key role in initiating deprescribing PPIs, so understanding their decision-making factors and strategies to improve feasibility is crucial. This study aimed to investigate the perspectives of GPs on deprescribing PPIs with a focus on identifying facilitators, barriers, and strategies to enhance feasibility in clinical settings.

Methods

A qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews was conducted with nine GPs or trainees. The thematic analysis of the interviews was conducted using NVivo R1 (2020).

Results

Four main categories were identified: 1) Inappropriate prescribing of PPIs, 2) Facilitators for deprescribing PPIs, 3) Barriers to deprescribing PPIs, 4) Feasibility of deprescribing PPIs. GPs acknowledged excessive and often inappropriate PPI prescribing, with a lack of deprescribing efforts mainly due to time constraints. Other key barriers included patient reluctance, fear of symptom recurrence, and unawareness of long-term risks. Patient-initiated request is key facilitator for deprescribing PPIs. GPs emphasized the need for collaboration with healthcare professionals, clear guidelines, improved digital support, increased physician availability, and raising awareness among providers and patients to enhance deprescribing feasibility.

Discussion

GPs are calling for a multifaceted approach to improve the feasibility of deprescribing PPIs, involving patient-centered approaches, systemic optimizations, support from other healthcare professionals, and provider-centered strategies to emphasize the importance of deprescribing PPIs.

Development of pharmacy-based best practices to support safer use and management of prescription opioids based on an e-Delphi methodology

BACKGROUND

Opioid utilization and related harm have increased in recent decades, notably in Australia, the United States, Canada, and some European countries. For people who are prescribed opioids, pharmacies offer an accessible, regular point-of-contact, providing a unique opportunity to address opioid prescription drugs risks.

OBJECTIVE

This project aimed to develop consensus-based, best practice statements for improving the safer use of prescription opioids through community pharmacy settings.

METHODS

The e-Delphi technique is used to obtain consensus from experts about issues where conclusive evidence is lacking, using multiple rounds of online participation. The investigator group identified an international group of potential participants with relevant expertise who were invited to the study, and asked to identify other experts for invitation. The e-Delphi process comprised three online rounds, involving (1) statement idea generation, (2) developing statement consensus, and (3) confirming and ranking statements.

RESULTS

A diverse group of 42 experts (76 % female, 6 countries) participated, comprising pharmacists (n = 24, 57 %), medical doctors of differing specialties (n = 12, 29 %), and/or researchers (n = 28, 67 %), with a mean of 15 years' professional experience (SD = 8.08). Eighty-five statements were initially developed in Round 1, and 78 were supported with amendments, with suggestions to merge and remove items in Round 2, resulting in 72 final statements which were all endorsed in Round 3. Items spanned seven themes: education, monitoring outcomes and risk, deprescribing and pain management, overdose education and naloxone, opioid agonist treatment, staff education, and overarching practices. Preferred terminology was determined in Round 2 and confirmed in Round 3.

CONCLUSIONS

Community pharmacies offer a unique opportunity to support the safer use of prescription opioids. These 72 best practice statements provide practical guidance on specific practices that pharmacists can undertake to support patients' safer use of prescription opioids and prevent or reduce harms from prescribed opioid use.

Stakeholders' perspectives and experiences of the pharmacist's role in deprescribing in ambulatory care: A qualitative meta-synthesis

BACKGROUND

Deprescribing is an effective strategy to manage polypharmacy and improve patient outcomes. The notion of a potential role for pharmacists in a multidisciplinary team approach to deprescribing has been identified in quantitative and qualitative literature. However, stakeholders' perceptions of this role, and factors that may impede or facilitate the pharmacist's involvement have not been elucidated. The application in ambulatory care also requires clarification. Understanding stakeholders' views is essential to optimise involvement of the pharmacist in deprescribing and improve practice.

OBJECTIVES

First, to synthesize the perspectives and experiences of stakeholders (primary care providers, pharmacists, patients, and carers) regarding the role and involvement of the pharmacist in deprescribing in ambulatory care settings. Second, to identify barriers and strategies to enhancing pharmacist involvement in deprescribing.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted across CINAHL, Embase, Medline, and Scopus from database inception to April 2023 for qualitative studies in English exploring the pharmacist's role in deprescribing. Data were extracted for iterative and inductive development of themes. A meta-synthesis facilitated the identification of overarching themes. Qualitative secondary analysis enabled identification of barriers and facilitators to the pharmacist's involvement in deprescribing.

RESULTS

From 285 articles identified, 9 studies were included which explored the views of general practitioners, specialist physicians, pharmacists, nurse practitioners, patients, carers, and general practice and clinic staff as stakeholders in deprescribing in ambulatory care. The meta-synthesis identified 4 over-arching themes: (1) therapeutic impetus and the status quo mentality, (2) role and responsibility, (3) multidisciplinary care, and (4) conflicting interests in pharmacy practice. Strategies to enhance pharmacists' involvement in deprescribing emerged from the data, and the pharmacist's role was strongly encouraged by stakeholders despite logistical and perceptual barriers identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporation of the strategies to enhance the pharmacist's involvement in deprescribing identified in this review is encouraged to optimise patient-centred care and improve practice.

Deprescribing NSAIDs: The Potential Role of Community Pharmacists

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are largely used for controlling various pain conditions and are widely available in community pharmacies, with and without prescription. Despite their effectiveness, NSAIDs can pose significant risks due to potential side effects and drug interactions, particularly in polypharmacy and comorbidity contexts and for vulnerable users. This study investigated whether and how NSAIDs deprescribing can be conducted at the community pharmacy level by assessing pharmacists' confidence, attitudes, and potential barriers and facilitators. Additionally, we aimed to identify any deprescribing guidelines that pharmacists could use. A literature search and a cross-sectional digital questionnaire targeting community pharmacists in Norway were conducted. Results showed that study participants (N = 73) feel confident in identifying needs for deprescribing NSAIDs but barriers such as time constraints, lack of financial compensation, and communication challenges were noted. Participants reported positive attitudes toward deprescribing but highlighted a need for better guidelines and training. This study highlights a gap in specific guidelines for deprescribing NSAIDs and a potential for enhancing pharmacists' roles in the deprescribing process, for example, through training and improved financial incentives. Further research is encouraged to develop concrete strategies for an effective implementation where community pharmacists can be involved in the deprescribing of NSAIDs.

Effects of a multicomponent communication training to involve older people in decisions to DEPRESCRIBE cardiometabolic medication in primary care (CO-DEPRESCRIBE): protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial with embedded process and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Deprescribing of medication for cardiovascular risk factors and diabetes has been incorporated in clinical guidelines but proves to be difficult to implement in primary care. Training of healthcare providers is needed to enhance deprescribing in eligible patients. This study will examine the effects of a blended training program aimed at initiating and conducting constructive deprescribing consultations with patients.

METHODS

A cluster-randomized trial will be conducted in which local pharmacy-general practice teams in the Netherlands will be randomized to conducting clinical medication reviews with patients as usual (control) or after receiving the CO-DEPRESCRIBE training program (intervention). People of 75 years and older using specific cardiometabolic medication (diabetes drugs, antihypertensives, statins) and eligible for a medication review will be included. The CO-DEPRESCRIBE intervention is based on previous work and applies models for patient-centered communication and shared decision making. It consists of 5 training modules with supportive tools. The primary outcome is the percentage of patients with at least 1 cardiometabolic medication deintensified. Secondary outcomes include patient involvement in decision making, healthcare provider communication skills, health/medication-related outcomes, attitudes towards deprescribing, medication regimen complexity and health-related quality of life. Additional safety and cost parameters will be collected. It is estimated that 167 patients per study arm are needed in the final intention-to-treat analysis using a mixed effects model. Taking loss to follow-up into account, 40 teams are asked to recruit 10 patients each. A baseline and 6-months follow-up assessment, a process evaluation, and a cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted.

DISCUSSION

The hypothesis is that the training program will lead to more proactive and patient-centered deprescribing of cardiometabolic medication. By a comprehensive evaluation, an increase in knowledge needed for sustainable implementation of deprescribing in primary care is expected.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT05507177).

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.

Involving community pharmacists in interprofessional collaboration in primary care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization supports interprofessional collaboration in primary care. On over the past 20 years, community pharmacists had been taking a growing number of new responsibilities and they are recognized as a core member of collaborative care teams as patient-centered care providers. This systematic review aimed to describe interprofessional collaboration in primary care involving a pharmacist, and its effect on patient related outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials cited in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo and CINAHL in English and French was conducted from inception to November 2022. Studies were included if they described an intervention piloted by a primary care provider and included a pharmacist and if they evaluated the effects of intervention on a disease or on patient related outcomes. The search generated 3494 articles. After duplicates were removed and titles and abstracts screened for inclusion, 344 articles remained.

RESULTS

Overall, 19 studies were included in the review and assessed for quality. We found 14 studies describing an exclusive collaboration between physician and pharmacist with for all studies a three-step model of pharmacist intervention: a medication review, an interview with the patient, and recommendations made to physician. Major topics in the articles eligible for inclusion included cardiovascular diseases with blood pressure, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and risk of cardiovascular diseases. Positive effects concerned principally blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaboration involving pharmacists is mainly described in relation to cardiovascular diseases, for which patient-centered indicators are most often positive. It underscores the need for further controlled studies on pharmacist-involved interprofessional collaboration across various medical conditions to improve consensus on core outcomes measures.

Evaluation of medication safety assessment tools for pharmacist-led medication reviews: the Eastern European pilot project

Background: Pharmacist-led medication reviews (MR) are one of the key methods to support medication safety in polypharmacy patients. The aims of this study were to pilot MRs in Eastern European community pharmacies, describe medication use in polypharmacy patients, and evaluate the usability of medication safety assessment tools. Methods: The MR pilot was undertaken in Estonia, Latvia, Poland, Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria. Patients who used at least five medicines were directed to the service by their GPs. Data on drug-related problems (DRPs) and adherence were collected by pharmacists through structured patient interviews. Databases for identification of potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) named Inxbase/Riskbase, as well as an integrated tool comprising potentially inappropriate medicines (PIMs) lists EU(7)-PIM and EURO-FORTA, were applied retroactively to the MR pilot data to investigate possibilities for their use and to describe medication use and potential risks in the study population. Results: A total of 318 patients were included in the study, 250 of them elderly (≥65 years). One hundred and eighty (56.6%) participants had a total of 504 pDDIs based on Inxbase analysis. On average, there were 1.6 pDDIs per participant. Twenty-five (5.0%) of the 504 pDDIs were in a high-risk category. A total of 279 (87.7%) participants had a potential ADR in at least one of 10 Riskbase categories. One hundred and fifty-four (20.8%) of the potential ADRs were in a high-risk category. Twenty-seven pDDIs and 68 ADRs documented as DRPs during the service were not included in the databases. Using the integrated EU(7)-PIM/EURO-FORTA PIM list, a total of 816 PIMs were found in 240 (96%) of the 250 elderly participants (on average 3.4 PIMs per elderly participant). Seventy-one (29.6%) of the participants were using high-risk PIMs. Twenty-one percent of high-risk PIMs and 13.8% of medium-risk PIMs were documented as DRPs by the pharmacists during the pilot. Conclusion: Medication safety assessment tools can be useful in guiding decision-making during MRs; however, these tools cannot replace patient interviews and monitoring. Tools that include a thorough explanation of the potential risks and are easy to use are more beneficial for MRs.

Inappropriate polypharmacy management versus deprescribing: A review on their relationship

Medication burden and polypharmacy are highly prevalent among patients with multimorbidity. There have been multiple initiatives to overcome polypharmacy and medication burden in patients with multimorbidity. These initiatives have evolved over time as effective in reducing the negative health consequences of polypharmacy. In recent years, the concept and practice of deprescribing has emerged and gained popularity as an efficient comprehensive approach to manage polypharmacy and ultimately improve health outcomes. Clinicians and researchers with interest in deprescribing view it as a novel and unique strategy that should be a part of effective prescribing process. However, other traditional polypharmacy management strategies such as drug review and medication therapy management still coexist. It is intriguing if deprescribing is considered as a type of these strategies or not. This narrative mini-review explored published literature in an effort to ascertain the differences and similarities between deprescribing and other prominent polypharmacy management interventions. It is clear that there is an overlap between deprescribing and inappropriate polypharmacy management. This is represented by focusing on multimorbid older adults, using similar explicit and implicit tools and having drug review as the core principle of both approaches. This overlap has probably made deprescribing considered as one of polypharmacy management approaches.

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.

Challenges in Deprescribing among Older Adults in Post-Acute Care Transitions to Home

OBJECTIVES

Medications with a higher risk of harm or that are unlikely to be beneficial are used by nearly all older patients in home health care (HHC). The objective of this study was to understand stakeholders' perspectives on challenges in deprescribing these medications for post-acute HHC patients.

DESIGN

Qualitative individual interviews were conducted with stakeholders involved with post-acute deprescribing.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANT

Older HHC patients, HHC nurses, pharmacists, and primary/acute care/post-acute prescribers from 9 US states participated in individual qualitative interviews.

MEASURES

Interview questions were focused on the experience, processes, roles, training, workflow, and challenges of deprescribing in hospital-to-home transitions. We used the constant comparison approach to identify and compare findings among patient, prescriber, and pharmacist and HHC nurse stakeholders.

RESULTS

We interviewed 9 older patients, 11 HHC nurses, 5 primary care physicians (PCP), 3 pharmacists, 1 hospitalist, and 1 post-acute nurse practitioner. Four challenges were described in post-acute deprescribing for HHC patients. First, PCPs' time constraints, the timing of patient encounters after hospital discharge, and the lack of prioritization of deprescribing make it difficult for PCPs to initiate post-acute deprescribing. Second, patients are often confused about their medications, despite the care team's efforts in educating the patients. Third, communication is challenging between HHC nurses, PCPs, specialists, and hospitalists. Fourth, the roles of HHC nurses and pharmacists are limited in care team collaboration and discussion about post-acute deprescribing.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Post-acute deprescribing relies on multiple parties in the care team yet it has challenges. Interventions to align the timing of deprescribing and that of post-acute care visits, prioritize deprescribing and allow clinicians more time to complete related tasks, improve medication education for patients, and ensure effective communication in the care team with synchronized electronic health record systems are needed to advance deprescribing during the transition from hospital to home.

The Effect of Pharmacist-Initiated Deprescribing Interventions in Older People: A Narrative Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background Polypharmacy is common among older people and may be associated with adverse drug events (ADEs) and poor health outcomes. Pharmacists are well-positioned to reduce polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications. Objective The objective of this narrative review was to summarize the results from randomized-controlled trials that evaluated pharmacist-led interventions with the goal or effect to deprescribe medications in older individuals. Data Sources We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL Complete, APA PsycInfo, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Data Synthesis Of the 25 studies included, the interventions were conducted in nursing facilities (n = 8), outpatient/community dwellings (n = 8), or community pharmacies (n = 9). Interventions were categorized as comprehensive medication reviews (n = 10), comprehensive medication reviews with pharmacist follow-up (n = 11), and educational interventions provided to patients and/or providers (n = 4). Pharmacist-led interventions had a beneficial effect on 22 out of 32 total medication-related outcomes (eg, number of medications, potentially inappropriate medications, or discontinuation). Most (n = 18) studies reported no evidence of an effect for other outcomes such as health care use, mortality, patient-centered outcomes (falls, cognition, function, quality of life), and ADEs. Discussion Interventions led to improvement in 69% of the medication-related outcomes examined across study settings. Five studies measured ADEs with none accounting for adverse drug-withdrawal events. Large well-designed studies that are powered to find an effect on patient-centered outcomes are needed. Conclusion Pharmacist-led interventions had a significant beneficial effect on medication-related outcomes. There was little evidence of benefit on other outcomes.

The role of pharmacists in deprescribing benzodiazepines: A scoping review

Background

Polypharmacy can increase the risk of adverse drug events, hospitalisation, and unnecessary healthcare costs. Evidence indicates that discontinuing certain medications, such as benzodiazepines, can improve health outcomes, by resolving adverse drug effects. This scoping review aims to explore the pharmacists' role in deprescribing benzodiazepines.

Method

A scoping review has been conducted to distinguish and map the literature, discover research gaps, and focus on targeted areas for future studies and research. A systematic search strategy was conducted to identify relevant studies from PubMed, Medline, and EMBASE databases. The eligibility criteria involved studies that focused on the role of pharmacists in benzodiazepine deprescribing, quantitative and qualitative studies conducted in humans, full-text articles published in English.

Results

Twenty studies were identified, revealing three themes: 1) pharmacists' involvement in benzodiazepine deprescribing, 2) the impact of their involvement, and 3) obstacles impeding the process. Pharmacists involved in deprescribing procedures, mainly through completing medication reviews, collaborative work with other healthcare providers, and education. Pharmacists' involvement in benzodiazepine deprescribing intervention led to better health and economic outcomes. Withdrawal symptoms after medication discontinuation, dependence on medication, and lack of time and guidelines were identified in the literature as barriers to deprescribing.

Conclusion

Pharmacists' involvement in deprescribing benzodiazepines is crucial for optimizing medication therapy. This scoping review examines the pharmacists' role in benzodiazepine deprescribing. The findings contribute to enhancing healthcare outcomes and guiding future research in this area.

Factors influencing French community pharmacists' willingness to participate in research projects: a mixed method study

BACKGROUND

French community pharmacists are facing an increasing demand to provide a wider range of services to meet the needs of the population. These new missions must be evaluated by primary care research studies. This study aims to explore the factors that influence French community pharmacists' willingness to participate in research projects.

METHODS

A mixed-method design was adopted for this study, comprising an initial quantitative online survey followed by semi-directed interviews. The investigation was conducted at two French faculties of pharmacy, Angers and Nantes, involving students in their 6th and final year of pharmacy education, and their community pharmacist tutors. The survey items were based on a study by Saini et al. and participants responded using five-point Likert scales. The semi-directed interviews were conducted after the quantitative analysis, only with volunteer and already graduated community pharmacists.

RESULTS

A total of 131 people participated in the quantitative analysis, comprising 75 students and 56 pharmacists. Pharmacists and students agreed on the significance of two key aspects: the research must possess a clear and meaningful purpose, and researchers must keep the pharmacists informed about the study's results. Among the 27 proposed items, only three showed significantly different results between students and pharmacists. Moreover, 11 semi-structured interviews were conducted. Research in the community pharmacy domain is relatively new for many pharmacists. Despite limited training, their willingness to participate is contingent on being actively involved from the outset, receiving appropriate support and training. However, the research should be seamlessly integrated into their daily practice, without being too time-consuming and administratively burdensome. Time constraints emerged as the main obstacle, along with concerns about the availability of human resources. Pharmacists expressed strong motivation driven by the research topic's relevance, and its potential impact on patients or the profession. While financial compensation is desirable, it did not appear to be the main criterion for participation in a study.

CONCLUSIONS

French pharmacists are willing to participate in research projects to improve patient care and develop the profession. Research teams must guide and involve from the project's inception.

Evaluation of potentially inappropriate medications use and medication complexity in elderly patients applying to community pharmacy in Turkey

BACKGROUND

Older adults often use multiple medicines to manage comorbidities well or to prevent associated complications. This study aims to determine polypharmacy, the use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) using the 2019 Beers Criteria and to determine the Medication Regimen Complexity Index (MRCI) score. It also aims to identify factors associated with the presence of PIMs and the MRCI score.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was carried out between 6 and 2023 and 5 May 2023 in a community pharmacy in Turkey. Elderly patients over 65 years of age, who used at least one drug, and who came to the pharmacy for any reason were included in the study. PIMs were determined according to the 2019 Beers Criteria. The Turkish validated version of the MRCI was used to determine the medication complexity score.

RESULTS

200 patients were included in this study. 59.5% of the patients were female and the median age was 70 (IQR, 66-74.75). Polypharmacy was detected in 33% of patients. The use of PIMs was determined in 63.5% of the patients. The median of the MRCI score was 11 (IQR, 7-15). The number of chronic diseases and drugs, presence of polypharmacy, MRCI score and mental disorders were found to be significantly higher in those with PIMs than in those without (p < 0.05). Having less than eight years of education, presence of polypharmacy, the presence of comorbidity (diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, thyroid, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma and mental disorders) were associated with significantly higher MRCI scores (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results of our study, it was found that the elderly patients who came to the pharmacy had low MRCI scores, but had high PIMs use. Community pharmacists have an important role in identifying inappropriate drug use, so they should be trained to develop skills in identifying and reducing PIMs in older patients.

Stakeholder Perspectives on Factors Related to Deprescribing Potentially Inappropriate Medications in Older Adults Receiving Dialysis

BACKGROUND

Potentially inappropriate medications, or medications that generally carry more risk of harm than benefit in older adults, are commonly prescribed to older adults receiving dialysis. Deprescribing, a systematic approach to reducing or stopping a medication, is a potential solution to limit potentially inappropriate medications use. Our objective was to identify clinicians and patient perspectives on factors related to deprescribing to inform design of a deprescribing program for dialysis clinics.

METHODS

We conducted rapid qualitative analysis of semistructured interviews and focus groups with clinicians (dialysis clinicians, primary care providers, and pharmacists) and patients (adults receiving hemodialysis aged 65 years or older and those aged 55-64 years who were prefrail or frail) from March 2019 to December 2020.

RESULTS

We interviewed 76 participants (53 clinicians [eight focus groups and 11 interviews] and 23 patients). Among clinicians, 24 worked in dialysis clinics, 18 worked in primary care, and 11 were pharmacists. Among patients, 13 (56%) were aged 65 years or older, 14 (61%) were Black race, and 16 (70%) reported taking at least one potentially inappropriate medication. We identified four themes (and corresponding subthemes) of contextual factors related to deprescribing potentially inappropriate medications: ( 1 ) system-level barriers to deprescribing (limited electronic medical record interoperability, time constraints and competing priorities), ( 2 ) undefined comanagement among clinicians (unclear role delineation, clinician caution about prescriber boundaries), ( 3 ) limited knowledge about potentially inappropriate medications (knowledge limitations among clinicians and patients), and ( 4 ) patients prioritize symptom control over potential harm (clinicians expect resistance to deprescribing, patient weigh risks and benefits).

CONCLUSIONS

Challenges to integration of deprescribing into dialysis clinics included siloed health systems, time constraints, comanagement behaviors, and clinician and patient knowledge and attitudes toward deprescribing.

Pharmacists' contribution to benzodiazepine deprescribing in older outpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Consolidated and reliable evidence regarding the effectiveness of pharmacist interventions for deprescribing benzodiazepines in older outpatients is lacking.

AIM

This study evaluated and summarized the impact of pharmacist interventions on benzodiazepine deprescribing among older outpatients.

METHOD

A literature search was conducted until August 2022 in PubMed, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. The review included randomized controlled trials that assessed the impact of pharmacist interventions on deprescribing benzodiazepine in older outpatients. Two independent investigators conducted the study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effect models in the RStudio software.

RESULTS

A total of 893 records were identified. Five studies, including 3,879 patients, met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. All five studies used health education as an intervention strategy, and three also conducted medication reviews. There was no evidence of the pharmacist's authority to modify prescriptions during benzodiazepine deprescribing. One study was classified as having a low risk of bias, whereas the other had some concerns or a high risk of bias. Three studies were included in the meta-analysis and a significant impact of pharmacist interventions on benzodiazepines deprescribing rates in older outpatients was observed (RR = 2.75 [95%CI 1.29; 5.89]; p = 0.04; I2 = 69%; low certainty of evidence).

CONCLUSION

Pharmacists may contribute to deprescribing benzodiazepines in older outpatients. Further studies are needed to increase the reliability of these findings. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022358563.

Barriers and facilitators for the implementation of the CombiConsultation by general practitioners, pharmacists and practice nurses: a qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

The CombiConsultation is a consultation with the pharmacist for patients with a chronic condition, aligned with the periodic consultation with the practice nurse or general practitioner. Implementation requires adjustments in the working methods of these healthcare providers and therefore behavioural changes.

AIM

The aim of this study was to identify the barriers and facilitators that determine the behavioural changes by pharmacists, general practitioners and practice nurses required for the implementation of the CombiConsultation.

METHOD

Ten community pharmacists, 5 practice nurses and 5 general practitioners were sampled from practices enrolled in the CombiConsultation study. Their views regarding the implementation of this clinical pharmacy service were explored using interviews based on the 14 domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), which are linked to the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour-model. Barriers and facilitators in the domains were assessed by content analysis.

RESULTS

Twelve barriers and 23 facilitators were found within 13 TDF domains with high agreement between the healthcare providers. Important facilitators for implementation were the pharmacists' expertise in pharmacotherapy (capability), access to medical data and physical proximity between professional practices (opportunity). Barriers were pharmacists' insufficient consultation- and clinical-reasoning skills (capability), insufficient staff (opportunity) and reimbursement and lack of coordination among all involved healthcare providers (motivation).

CONCLUSION

All healthcare providers are motivated to implement the CombiConsultation. An existing collaborative practice, with a clear and accepted professional role of the pharmacist is essential. Training of pharmacists in consultation and clinical-reasoning skills can be beneficial, as well as arrangements on the consultation logistics, and reimbursement.

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.

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

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

Tailoring a complex intervention to reduce antidepressants in institutionalized older persons with dementia

INTRODUCTION

First-line treatment for behavioral and psychiatric symptoms of dementia is non-pharmacological. Still, psychotropic medication is widely used, despite its limited effect and harmful side-effects. More than half of all nursing home residents with dementia receive antidepressants, even though deprescribing is safe and feasible. Interventions to promote deprescribing of antidepressants in nursing homes are few and complex. To optimize the deprescribing process through an intervention, transparency for the development of the intervention is needed. We aim to describe the steps in the development and tailoring of an intervention targeting GPs, nursing home staff, and relatives to enhance collaboration on reducing the use of antidepressants in institutionalized older persons with dementia in Denmark.

METHOD

A step-wise process guided by the core elements in the Medical Research Council constituted the tailoring process. Five steps were included; 1) a literature search, 2) interviews with stakeholders, 3) drafting the intervention prototype, 4) professionals' assessment of the intervention, and 5) refinement of the intervention. The steps were conducted from June 2020 to June 2022.

RESULTS

Based on the literature search, interviews with stakeholders, and professionals' assessment of the intervention, four main themes were identified; 1) focusing on antidepressants, 2) importance of professional qualifications, 3) collaboration and communication, and 4) patient and relative involvement. They guided intervention development and refinement of the final intervention, which included 1) a case-based training course and 2) a dialog tool including a symptom assessment scale to be used in a structured consultation at the nursing home.

CONCLUSION

This study presents a detailed account of the tailoring process for a complex intervention to optimize deprescribing of antidepressants for older persons with dementia at nursing homes. By presenting a thorough development process, we expect to achieve increased adherence to the intervention which is currently being tested in an ongoing cluster randomized controlled trial. The transparency of the process will also increase the future development of other similar complex interventions.

Longitudinal study of Good Pharmacy Practice roles covered at the annual world pharmacy congresses 2003-2019

BACKGROUND

Globally accepted roles of pharmacists are described in the Good Pharmacy Practice (GPP) standards, published by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) in 2011. These standards provide a wide-ranging description of four main roles pharmacists fulfil. The global platform, where pertinent discussions around excellence and innovation in various pharmacy roles take place, is the annual congress of the pharmacy organisation representing the profession globally, FIP.

OBJECTIVES

Given the world pharmacy congresses present and reflect on the most topical and contemporary matters, this longitudinal study aimed at creating a historical overview of the frequency of appearance of the different GPP roles in the programmes of the past 17 congresses (2003-2019). This is to distinguish the dominance of different roles over time and thus their relevance for the profession.

METHODS

The GPP standards served as a framework to create a set of keywords that were analysed for their frequencies of appearance in the programmes through text analysis. Trends in the four overarching GPP roles and at individual keyword level were analysed descriptively over time.

RESULTS

The study found that all four GPP roles appeared in the programme each year and none of them was significantly missing, neither in the decade preceding the publication of the GPP standards nor in the decade thereafter. Role 3 "Maintain and improve professional performance" was most frequently represented, also demonstrating an upward trend in appearance, together with Role 4: "Contribute to improve effectiveness of the health-care system and public health". Trends emerged towards patient-centred clinical focus and positioning pharmacy as an important player in the health-care system-observed also at individual keywords level in areas such as health promotion-away from the more traditional product-centred practice roles such as compounding.

CONCLUSIONS

GPP roles have been already covered by the FIP annual congresses (long) before 2011, when the GPP roles were formally adopted, and they stayed relevant in the decade after. The more pronounced dominance toward the roles related to improving professional performance and positioning pharmacy are in line with the trend that the rather technical topics in pharmacy are increasingly covered by specialised meetings and that the FIP annual congresses have moved toward more general, scholarly platforms for dialogue and conversation.

Medication-Related Problems and Interventions Identified and Addressed by Pharmacists Conducting Enhanced Medication Therapy Management Services

Pharmacists identify, resolve, and document medication-related problems (MRPs) in community pharmacies. Enhanced medication therapy management (eMTM) targets specific situations, such as high-risk medications, while continuous medication monitoring (CoMM) occurs for every patient and is integrated into the dispensing process. This study describes types and frequencies of MRPs and interventions for health plan-directed eMTM and pharmacist-identified CoMM for a cohort of Medicare Part D patients. Pharmacy dispensing and clinical records from one independent community pharmacy in the Midwest were reviewed for patients eligible for eMTM in 2019. Data were coded for medication-related problems and interventions; descriptive statistics were calculated. Forty-seven patients were included in the study, resulting in 439 health plan-directed and 775 pharmacist-identified MRPs and corresponding interventions for a total of 1214 over 12 months. The average age of the patients was 77; they received an average of about 14 medications dispensed over 25 dates. Nonadherence was the most common MRP overall, as well as for the two categories separately. Patient Counseling and Lab Values Needed MRPs were found more often by pharmacists. Continue to Monitor was the most common intervention flagged overall. Medication Discontinued was found more often in health plan-directed interventions; Patient Counseling occurred more frequently in pharmacist-identified interventions. Using pharmacists to identify MRPs can complement health plan-driven eMTM, which can provide more complete medication management. Future work is needed to determine if this approach is reproducible in other pharmacies.

Development and Validation of Comprehensive Healthcare Providers' Opinions, Preferences, and Attitudes towards Deprescribing (CHOPPED Questionnaire)

Successful implementation of deprescribing requires exploring healthcare professionals’ opinions, preferences, and attitudes towards deprescribing. The aim of this study was to develop and validate the questionnaire exploring healthcare providers’ opinions preferences and attitudes towards deprescribing (CHOPPED questionnaire). This was a cross-sectional on-line survey. A comprehensive 58-item questionnaire, in two versions (for pharmacists and physicians), was developed through an extensive literature review and interviews with experts. The questionnaire was validated, and its reliability was assessed through data collected from 356 pharmacists and 109 physicians. Exploratory factor analysis was performed, and 37- and 35-item questionnaires were developed. Ten factors were identified: knowledge, awareness, patient barriers and facilitators, competencies barriers and facilitators, collaboration barriers and facilitators, and healthcare system barriers and facilitators. The CHOPPED tool has satisfactory face, content (CVR > 0.62) (content validity ratio), construct, and criterion validity. The reliability statistics of all factors in both versions was acceptable with Cronbach’s alpha > 0.6. Test−retest reliability analysis showed that gamma rank correlations of total factor scores were strong and very strong (between 0.519 and 0.938). The CHOPPED tool can be used as a valid and reliable tool to explore healthcare providers’ opinions and attitudes toward discontinuing medications in the primary care setting in Croatia.

Exploring Patients' Attitudes Toward Deprescribing and Their Perception of Pharmacist Involvement in a European Country: A Cross-Sectional Study

PURPOSE

To explore how adult patients perceive deprescribing in a country with developing pharmaceutical care.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a multicenter cross-sectional study conducted in ten community pharmacies across Croatia. Community-dwelling adults 40 years and older, taking at least one prescription medication long term, were invited to participate. The revised and validated Patients' Attitude Towards Deprescribing Questionnaire was used to investigate community-dwelling adults' opinions on potential medication discontinuation. Questions regarding the patients' perception of pharmacist competences and involvement as well as patients' preferences in deprescribing were added. Collected data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics using descriptive and inferential statistical analysis. Binary logistic regression was used to explore potential predictive factors of willingness to have medication deprescribed. All tests were performed as two-tailed and a p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 315 adults aged 40 years and older completed the questionnaire. Majority of participants, 83.81% (95% CI, 79.72% to 87.90%) stated that they were satisfied with their medications, and 83.81% (95% CI, 79.72% to 87.90%) would be willing to deprescribe one or more medications. Participants expressed a positive attitude toward pharmacists' competences (68.89%, 95% CI, 63.75% to 74.03%) and involvement in deprescribing (71.11%, 95% CI, 66.08% to 76.14%). Participants who stated specific medication as deprescribing preference were more likely show dissatisfaction with current medication and show greater willingness to have medication deprescribed. Three factors were found to be associated with a positive attitude towards deprescribing: low concerns about stopping factor score (aOR 0.54, 95% CU=0.35-0.84; p=0.006), low appropriateness factor score (aOR 0.62, 95% CI=0.39-0.98; p=0.039), and a positive opinion on pharmacist involvement (aOR 2.35, 95% CI=1.18-4.70; p= 0.016).

CONCLUSION

This study showed the patient's willingness for deprescription as well as their positive attitude towards pharmacists being involved in the process. Results favour transition to a patient-centred care and shared-decision making model.