Patient attitudes towards and experiences with an intervention programme to reduce chronic acid-suppressing drug intake in primary care

Encouraging appropriate use of proton pump inhibitors: existing initiatives and proposals for the future

INTRODUCTION

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have revolutionized the management of acid-related disorders, representing today the mainstay treatment of these conditions. However, despite their large range of indications and usefulness, the remarkable expansion of their use in the last two decades cannot be explained by the increasing prevalence of acid-related diseases only. An inappropriate prescription for clinical conditions in which the pathogenetic role of acid has not been documented has been described, with the natural consequence of increasing the costs and the potential risk of iatrogenic harm due to adverse events and complications recently emerged.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we summarize current indications of PPIs administration, potential adverse events associated with their chronic utilization, and misuse of PPIs. Moreover, we describe existing and possible initiatives for improving the use of PPIs, and some proposals for the future.

EXPERT OPINION

PPI deprescribing is the preferred and most effective approach to reduce the use of PPIs, rather than adopting sharp discontinuation, probably due to fewer withdrawal symptoms. Nonetheless, large knowledge gaps still exist in clinical practice regarding the optimal approach of PPI deprescribing in various clinical scenarios. Further prospective well-designed international studies are eagerly warranted to improve our perspectives on controlling global PPI inappropriate use.

Patient Awareness of Reported Adverse Effects Associated with Proton Pump Inhibitors in a Medically Underserved Community

Reports of adverse effects associated with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are concerning because of high usage and over-the-counter availability. We sought to determine the awareness of PPI adverse effects among our patient population, which is medically underserved, low-income, and racially diverse. A 21-item survey was administered to gastroenterology-clinic outpatients. It collected information about age, gender, education, race, specialty of the prescriber, specific PPI, indication, knowledge of dose, adherence, duration of use and awareness of any risks. Medical records were reviewed to verify survey responses pertaining to indication, dosing, and adherence. A vast majority (96%) of 101 participants were not aware of PPI adverse effects. In total, 63% of the patients completed a high school education or less, which was associated with a higher risk of long-term PPI use than completion of at least an undergraduate degree (p = 0.05). In contrast to other studies, the shockingly low patient awareness about PPI adverse effects in our patient population is particularly concerning, especially as it is tied to their demographic attributes. This may lead to long-term and high-dose PPI use. Our study highlights the need for effective provider-driven education regarding medication risks, especially in the communities with significant health disparities.

Protocol for a randomised trial of higher versus lower intensity patient-provider communication interventions to reduce antibiotic misuse in two paediatric ambulatory clinics in the USA

INTRODUCTION

Children with acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) are prescribed up to 11.4 million unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions annually. Inadequate parent-provider communication is a chief contributor, yet efforts to reduce overprescribing have only indirectly targeted communication or been impractical. This paper describes our multisite, parallel group, cluster randomised trial comparing two feasible interventions for enhancing parent-provider communication on the rate of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing (primary outcome) and revisits, adverse drug reactions and parent-rated quality of shared decision-making, parent-provider communication and visit satisfaction (secondary outcomes).

METHODS/ANALYSIS

We will attempt to recruit all eligible paediatricians and nurse practitioners (currently 47) at an academic children's hospital and a private practice. Using a 1:1 randomisation, providers will be assigned to a higher intensity education and communication skills or lower intensity education-only intervention and trained accordingly. We will recruit 1600 eligible parent-child dyads. Parents of children ages 1-5 years who present with ARTI symptoms will be managed by providers trained in either the higher or lower intensity intervention. Before their consultation, all parents will complete a baseline survey and view a 90 s gain-framed antibiotic educational video. Parent-child dyads consulting with providers trained in the higher intensity intervention will, in addition, receive a gain-framed antibiotic educational brochure promoting cautious use of antibiotics and rate their interest in receiving an antibiotic which will be shared with their provider before the visit. All parents will complete a postconsultation survey and a 2-week follow-up phone survey. Due to the two-stage nested design (parents nested within providers and clinics), we will employ generalised linear mixed-effect regression models.

ETHICS/DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained from the Children's Mercy Hospital Pediatric Institutional Review Board (#16060466). Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03037112; Pre-results.

Review of deprescribing processes and development of an evidence-based, patient-centred deprescribing process

Inappropriate use of medication is widespread, especially in older people, and is associated with risks, including adverse drug reactions, hospitalization and increased mortality. Optimization of appropriate medication use to minimize these harms is an ongoing challenge in healthcare. The term 'deprescribing' has been used to describe the complex process that is required for safe and effective cessation of medication. Patients play an important role in their own health and, while they may complain about the number of medications they have to take, they may also be reluctant to cease a medication when given the opportunity to do so. A review of previously proposed deprescribing processes and relevant literature was used to develop the patient-centred deprescribing process, which is a five-step cycle that encompasses gaining a comprehensive medication history, identifying potentially inappropriate medications, determining whether the potentially inappropriate medication can be ceased, planning the withdrawal regimen (e.g. tapering where necessary) and provision of monitoring, support and documentation. This is the first deprescribing process developed using knowledge of the patients' views of medication cessation; it focuses on engaging patients throughout the process, with the aim of improving long-term health outcomes. Despite a comprehensive review of the literature, there is still a lack in the evidence base on which to conduct deprescribing. The next step in broadening the evidence to support deprescribing will be to test the developed process to determine feasibility in the clinical setting.

A health insurance company-initiated practice support intervention for optimizing acid-suppressing drug prescriptions in primary care

BACKGROUND

A health insurance-initiated programme to improve cost-effectiveness of acid-suppressing drugs (ASDs).

AIM

To evaluate the effect of two different interventions of general practitioner support in reducing drug prescription.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A sequential cluster randomized controlled trial with 90 participating general practitioners in a telephone support (TS) group or practice visit (PV) group. TS group received support in phase-1 (first 6 months), but served as control group in phase-2 (6-12 months period). PV group received no intervention in phase-1, serving as the control group for the TS group, but received support in phase-2. Prescription data were extracted from Agis Health Insurance Database. Outcomes were the proportion of responders to drug reduction and the number of defined daily dose (DDD). Differences in users and DDD were analysed using multilevel regression analysis.

RESULTS

At baseline, 3424 patients used ASD chronically (211 DDDs, on average). The difference between TS and control groups among responders was 3.2% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.8; 5.6] and relative risk was 1.26 (95% CI: 1.06; 1.51). The difference between PV and control groups was not relevant (0.4%, 95% CI: -1.99; 2.79 and relative risk: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.82; 1.20). The difference in DDD per patient was -3.0 (95% CI: -8.9; 2.9) and -5.82 (95% CI: -12.4; 0.73), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This health insurance company-initiated intervention had a moderate effect on ASD prescription. In contrast to TS, PVs did not seem to reduce ASD prescription rates.