The Prevalence of Polypharmacy and Potentially Inappropriate Medications and Its Relationship with Cognitive Status in Portuguese Institutionalized Older Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study

Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescribing of benzodiazepines in older nursing home residents

INTRODUCTION

Previous research has raised concerns about high prevalence of drug-related problems, polypharmacy and inappropriate benzodiazepine prescribing in nursing homes (NHs) and confirmed lack of studies from Central and South-Eastern Europe. The aim of our study was to determine the prevalence and characteristics of polypharmacy, hyperpolypharmacy and inappropriate benzodiazepine prescribing in NH residents in Croatia.

METHODS

Data from 226 older NH residents from five Croatian NHs were collected using the InterRAI Long-Term Care Facilities assessment form. The prevalence and determinants of polypharmacy/hyperpolypharmacy and patterns of inappropriate benzodiazepine prescribing were documented.

RESULTS

The prevalence of polypharmacy (49.6%) and hyperpolypharmacy (25.7%) among NH residents was high. In our study, 72.1% of NH residents were prescribed at least one psychotropic agent, 36.7% used 2-3 psychotropics and 6.6% used 4+ psychotropics. Among benzodiazepine users (55.8%), 28% of residents were prescribed benzodiazepines in higher than recommended geriatric doses, 75% used them for the long term and 48% were prescribed concomitant interacting medications. The odds of being prescribed polypharmacy/hyperpolypharmacy were significantly higher for older patients with polymorbidity (6+ disorders, proportional odds ratio (POR) = 19.8), type II diabetes (POR = 5.2), ischemic heart disease (POR = 4.6), higher frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS ≥5); POR = 4.3) and gastrointestinal problems (POR = 4.8).

CONCLUSIONS

Our research underscores the persistent challenge of inappropriate medication use and drug-related harms among older NH residents, despite existing evidence and professional campaigns. Effective regulatory and policy interventions, including the implementation of geriatrician and clinical pharmacy services, are essential to address this critical issue and ensure optimal medication management for vulnerable NH populations.

Comparing AGS Beers 2019, STOPP version 2, and EU(7)-PIM list in Portuguese older adults in primary health care

PURPOSE

This study aims to identify PIM prevalence in older adults according to the 2019 Beers criteria, Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions version 2 (STOPP v2) criteria, and the Portuguese EU(7)-PIM list and also to analyze the concordance between these criteria.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted among 1200 Portuguese older adults (≥ 65 years old), users of primary health care. Demographic, clinical, and pharmacological data were collected concerning the period between April 2021 and August 2022. A comparative analysis was performed between the three PIM identification criteria, and the concordance was determined according to the Lin concordance correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

The mean age was 76.3 (SD 7.7) years old and 57.6% of the older adults were females. Our findings indicate varying prevalence rates among these criteria with 63.8% (95% CI 61.0-66.6%), 66.8% (95% CI 64.1-69.5%), and 50.1% (95% CI 47.2-53.0%) of the older adults take at least one PIM according to the EU(7)-PIM list, Beers 2019, and STOPP v2 criteria, respectively. The highest prevalence observed was for proton pump inhibitors according to EU(7)-PIM list (30.1%, 95% CI 27.6-32.9) and Beers criteria (30.1%, 95% CI 27.6-32.9) and alprazolam according to STOPP v2 criteria (10.1%, 95% CI 8.4-11.9%). A poor concordance between criteria was observed (< 0.834). The highest concordance coefficient was found between the EU(7)-PIM list and the Beers criteria (0.833), and the lowest between the EU(7)-PIM list and STOPP criteria (0.735).

CONCLUSION

This study reveals varying prevalence rates of PIM in older adults, as assessed by different criteria, and highlights the need for targeted interventions and improved prescribing practices. In the future, studies should focus on the occurrence of negative outcomes in older adults associated with PIM consumption.

Potentially inappropriate medication prescribing based on 2019 Beers criteria and the impact of pharmacist intervention in elderly patients with kidney diseases: A report from Iran

Background and Aims

A potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) is a pharmaceutical agent that poses a greater risk of harm than potential benefit to elderly patients. This study aimed to detect PIMs and their risk factors in hospitalized elderly patients with kidney disease.

Methods

This cross-sectional study assessed medication orders of elderly patients (≥65 years old) with kidney diseases admitted to the hospital. In the first 6 months, we retrospectively evaluated all medications to identify PIMs according to the 2019 Beers criteria. In the second phase, a clinical pharmacist prospectively evaluated all medications and suggested modifications as needed. Data were analyzed to determine risk factors for prescribing PIMs.

Results

Based on our evaluation of 258 patients, we observed that the utilization of PIMs was prevalent among the study population. Of the total patients evaluated, 273 instances of PIM use were identified, with only 23.3% of patients not having any PIMs. Notably, proton pump inhibitors and benzodiazepines were the most frequently prescribed PIMs. The risk of experiencing a PIM was significantly amplified by a higher degree of polypharmacy, with odds approximately 2.68 times higher (p < 0.01). Several factors were found to be associated with an increased likelihood of having a PIM, including being male, undergoing hemodialysis, having chronic kidney disease or other comorbidities, and having an extended hospital stay. The second phase of study, in terms of addressing these issues, physicians adhered to 67.5% of the 120 recommendations made by pharmacists regarding the discontinuation of PIM usage.

Conclusion

High prevalence of PIMs was detected in our study population. Preventing medication-associated harms in the elderly can reduce the financial burden imposed on healthcare systems. Therefore, routine evaluation of medications with clinical pharmacists and/or implementation of computerized medication decision support systems is recommended to prevent PIMs use.

A systematic review of randomised-controlled trials on deprescribing outcomes in older adults with polypharmacy

BACKGROUND

Mixed findings about deprescribing impact have emerged from varied study designs, interventions, outcome measures and targeting sub-categories of medications or morbidities. This systematic review controls for study design by reviewing randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) of deprescribing interventions using comprehensive medication profiles. The goal is to provide a synthesis of interventions and patient outcomes to inform healthcare providers and policy makers about deprescribing effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aims to (1) review RCT deprescribing studies focusing on complete medication reviews of older adults with polypharmacy across all health settings, (2) map patients' clinical and economic outcomes against intervention and implementation strategies and (3) inform research agendas based on observed benefits and best practices.

METHODS

The PRISMA framework for systematic reviews was followed. Databases used were EBSCO Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus and Web of Science. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomised trials.

RESULTS

Fourteen articles were included. Interventions varied in setting, preparation, use of interdisciplinary teams, validated guidelines and tools, patient-centredness and implementation strategy. Thirteen studies (92.9%) found deprescribing interventions reduced the number of drugs and/or doses taken. No studies found threats to patient safety in terms of primary outcomes including morbidity, hospitalisations, emergency room use and falls. Four of five studies identifying health quality of life as a primary outcome found significant effects associated with deprescribing. Both studies with cost as their primary outcome found significant effects as did two with cost as a secondary outcome. Studies did not systematically study how intervention components influenced deprescribing impact. To explore this gap, this review mapped studies' primary outcomes to deprescribing intervention components using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Five studies had significant, positive primary outcomes related to health-related quality of life (HRQOL), cost and/or hospitalisation, with four reporting patient-centred elements in their intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

RCT primary outcomes found deprescribing is safe and reduces drug number or dose. Five RCTs found a significant deprescribing impact on HRQOL, cost or hospitalisation. Important future research agendas include analysing (1) understudied outcomes like cost, and (2) intervention and implementation components that enhance effectiveness, such as patient-centred elements.

Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire to Portuguese: Older adults version

BACKGROUND

Deprescribing is a patient-centered approach to managing inappropriate polypharmacy that faces several barriers, including patients' attitudes and beliefs about medications that need to be considered. For this purpose, the revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire is a helpful instrument, but until now, there is no Portuguese version.

OBJECTIVES

To translate and validate the rPATD questionnaire (older adults version) to Portuguese.

METHODS

The rPATD questionnaire was translated and cross-culturally adapted using forward-backward translation and pre-testing. A cross-sectional study with 192 older adults aged ≥65 years taking at least 1 regular medication was conducted for validity assessment. Participants were recruited by convenience sampling in 3 Portuguese outpatient rehabilitation medicine clinics. Psychometric properties were evaluated through face and content validity; construct validity, by assessing structural validity through exploratory factor analysis, hypotheses testing, including concurrent validity and cross cultural validity; reliability with internal consistency; and item-total correlation. Floor and ceiling effects were examined.

RESULTS

The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) revealed a 4-factor structure that explains 51.08% of the total variance, as in the original rPATD. These 4 factors are related to the level of involvement in medication management, beliefs in the appropriateness of medication, perceived burden of medication, and concerns about stopping medications. Factor loadings ranged from 0.226 to 0.800; 2 items scored <0.3, and no cross-loading was found. The exclusion of the 2 items loading <0.3 in the EFA showed no significant improvement in factor loading or internal consistency, so the item structure was maintained. In hypothesis testing, 78% of the correlations were correctly predicted. The 4 factors internal consistency was generally acceptable, with Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.638 to 0.830. The item-total correlation ranged between 0.223 and 0.7.

CONCLUSION

The Portuguese rPATD questionnaire for older adults presents globally good or acceptable psychometric properties.

Potentially Inappropriate Medications among Elderly with Frailty in a Tertiary Care Academic Medical Centre in Saudi Arabia

This study aims to assess the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and to analyze the relationship between the PIMs and frailty among inpatient older adults aged 65 and above in Saudi Arabia. A retrospective cross-sectional study design was utilized during the period between April 2021 and April 2022 of all patients aged 65 years and above admitted in a public tertiary hospital in Saudi Arabia. Data on the number of medications and the use of PIMs were assessed using Beers’ criteria while the frailty status was assessed using the “FRAIL Scale”. Of the 358 patient files that were reviewed, 52.2% were males, 60.9% were aged 65−74 years, and 82% were married. The prevalence of robust, prefrail, and frail patients was 5%, 36.9%, and 58.1%, respectively. According to the 2019 Beers criteria, a total of 45.8% (n = 164) participants identified as using PIMs. Compared to the non-PIMs group, the PIMs group demonstrated significant differences in the number of medications (p < 0.001), the number of comorbidities (p < 0.05), and the frailty score (p < 0.001). The strongest predictor of PIM use was a number of comorbidities, recording an odds ratio of 2.86, (95% CI 1.21−6.77, p < 0.05). Our results show that the use of PIM was significantly associated with frail older adults with multiple comorbidities and in patients with polypharmacy. A clear assessment and evaluation tool may improve the quality of drug treatment in the older adult population, particularly in frail patients.