Pharmaco-epistemology for the prescribing geriatrician

The Ethics of Deprescribing in Older Adults

Deprescribing is the term used to describe the process of withdrawal of an inappropriate medication supervised by a clinician. This article presents a discussion of how the Four Principles of biomedical ethics (beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice) that may guide medical practitioners' prescribing practices apply to deprescribing medications in older adults. The view of deprescribing as an act creates stronger moral duties than if viewed as an omission. This may explain the fear of negative outcomes which has been reported by prescribers as a barrier to deprescribing. Respecting the autonomy of older adults is complex as they may not wish to be active in the decision-making process; they may also have reduced cognitive function and family members may therefore have to step in as surrogate decision-makers. Informed consent is intended as a process of information giving and reflection, where consent can be withdrawn at any time. However, people are rarely updated on the altered risks and benefits of their long-term medications as they age. Cessation of inappropriate medication use has a large financial benefit to the individual and the community. However, the principle of justice also dictates equal rights to treatment regardless of age.

Quality of drug prescribing in older patients: is there a problem and can we improve it?

Older patients are at high risk of suboptimal prescribing (overuse, underuse and misuse of drugs), which can lead to serious adverse drug reactions (ADR). About one in four patients admitted to hospital are prescribed at least one inappropriate medication and up to 20% of all inpatient deaths are attributed to potentially preventable ADR. Lists of drugs to avoid (unnecessary or where risks outweigh benefits) and drugs not to be omitted (strong indications if there are no contraindications) can assist in identifying suboptimal prescribing although, to date, no trials have established the ability of such screening, by itself, to improve prescribing quality. Remedial strategies proven to be effective in randomized trials include detailed appraisal of medication lists by multidisciplinary teams, which involve geriatricians and close liaison with specialist clinical pharmacists. A multifaceted quality improvement strategy is proposed that includes an aspirational target of no more than five different drugs be regularly prescribed to vulnerable older patients. Achieving this target involves prioritizing drug selection on the basis of strength of indication which may run counter to current disease-specific clinical guideline recommendations based on trials that have excluded most older patients. Such a strategy is worthy of further evaluation in a multicentre randomized trial.

The basis for improving and reforming long-term care. Part 4: identifying meaningful improvement approaches (segment 2)

While many aspects of nursing home care have improved over time, numerous issues persist. Presently, a potpourri of approaches and a push to "fix" the problem have overshadowed efforts to correctly define the problems and identify their diverse causes. This fourth and final article in the series (divided between last month's issue and this one) recommends strategies to make sense of improvement and reform efforts. This month's concluding segment covers additional proposed approaches. Despite the challenges of the current environment, all of the proposed strategies could potentially be applied with little or no delay. Despite having brought vast increases in knowledge, the research effort may be losing its traction as a formidable force for meaningful change. It is necessary to rethink the questions being asked and the scope of answers being sought. A shift to overcoming implementation challenges is needed. In addition, it is essential to address issues of jurisdiction (the apparent "ownership" of assessment and decision making over patient problems or body parts) and reductionism (the excessive management of these issues and problems without proper context) that result in fragmented and problematic care. Issues of knowledge and skill also need to be addressed, with greater emphasis on key generic and technical competencies of staff and practitioners, in addition to factual knowledge. There is a need to rethink the approach to measuring performance and trying to improve quality of care and services. There are significant limits to trying to use quality measures to improve outcomes and performance. Ultimately, vast improvement is needed in applying care principles and practices, independent of regulatory sources. Reimbursement needs to be revamped so that it helps promote care that is consistent with human biology and other key concepts. Finally, improving long-term care will require a coordinated societal effort. All social institutions and health care settings need to address their own shortcomings and contribute constructively in order to improve and reform nursing homes and health care generally. It is not helpful to scapegoat nursing homes for what are far more universal problems of care, practice, and performance.