Recommendations to support deprescribing medications late in life

Better drug use in advanced disease: an international Delphi study

Patients with a limited life expectancy use many medications, some of which may be questionable. OBJECTIVES : To identify possible solutions for difficulties concerning medication management and formulate recommendations to improve medication management at the end of life. METHODS : A two-round Delphi study with experts in the field of medication management and end-of-life care (based on ranking in the citation index in Web of Science and relevant publications). We developed a questionnaire with 58 possible solutions for problems regarding medication management at the end of life that were identified in previously performed studies. RESULTS : A total of 42 experts from 13 countries participated. Response rate in the first round was 93%, mean agreement between experts for all solutions was 87 % (range 62%-100%); additional suggestions were given by 51%. The response rate in the second round was 74%. Awareness, education and timely communication about medication management came forward as top priorities for guidelines. In addition, solutions considered crucial by many of the experts were development of a list of inappropriate medications at the end of life and incorporation of recommendations for end-of-life medication management in disease-specific guidelines. CONCLUSIONS : In this international Delphi study, experts reached a high level of consensus on recommendations to improve medication management in end-of-life care. These findings may contribute to the development of clinical practice guidelines for medication management in end-of-life care.

Deprescription in Palliative Care

Individuals with limited life expectancy represent a significant proportion of healthcare consumers and are usually patients with multiple diseases and high levels of frailty. Polypharmacy and the prescription of long lists of drugs are frequent in patients with reduced life expectancy and often, as the patient's health status deteriorates, the list of drugs increases substantially as new medications are introduced to address new symptoms or complications. A key priority for healthcare professionals managing the care of these patients should be balancing the pharmacological approach to chronic diseases with the palliation of acute symptoms and complications. An important element of this process is to ensure that the benefit of any prescription decision outweighs potential risks. We reviewed the pros and cons of deprescribing drugs in individuals with limited life expectancy, how to identify the expected disease trajectory, which drugs are to be discontinued, identified some models trying to achieve rigorous deprescribing criteria, and the psychosocial effects of deprescribing in late phases of life. Deprescribing is not a one-time event but rather a continuous process that requires ongoing evaluation and monitoring. It is vital to continuously monitor and evaluate the pharmacological and non-pharmacological prescriptions for patients with chronic illnesses to align them with their goals of care and life expectancy.

A systematic review on methods for developing and validating deprescribing tools for older adults with limited life expectancy

OBJECTIVES

A number of deprescribing tools are available to assist clinicians to make decisions on medication management. We aimed to review deprescribing tools that may be used with older adults that have limited life expectancy (LLE), including those at the palliative and end-of-life stage, and consider the rigour with which the tools were developed and validated.

KEY FINDINGS

Literature was searched in PubMed, Embase, CINHAL and Google Scholar until February 2021 for studies involving the development and/or consensus validation of deprescribing tools targeting those aged ≥65 years with LLE. We were interested in the tool development process, tool validation process and clinical components addressed by the tool.Six studies were included. The approaches followed for tool development were systematic review (n = 3), expert-literature review (n = 2) and concept data (n = 1). The content included a list of disease-non-specific medications divided with or without recommendations (n = 4) and disease-specific medications with recommendations (n = 2). The tool validation was performed using the Delphi method (n = 4) or GRADE framework (n = 2) with panel size ranging from 8 to 17 and 60-80% consensus agreement with or without a rating scale. LLE targeted were ≤1 year (n = 2) or ≤3 months (n = 1).

SUMMARY

There is a limited number of deprescribing tools with consensus validation available for use in older adults with LLE. These tools are either targeted for disease-specific medication/medication class guided by the GRADE framework or targeted for a list of medications or medication classes irrespective of disease that are developed using a combination of approaches and validated using a Delphi method.

Understanding older patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed in primary care: a protocol for a cross-sectional survey study in nine European countries

INTRODUCTION

To reduce inappropriate polypharmacy, deprescribing should be part of patients' regular care. Yet deprescribing is difficult to implement, as shown in several studies. Understanding patients' attitudes towards deprescribing at the individual and country level may reveal effective ways to involve older adults in decisions about medications and help to implement deprescribing in primary care settings. In this study we aim to investigate older adults' perceptions and views on deprescribing in different European countries. Specific objectives are to investigate the patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed by medication type and to have herbal or dietary supplements reduced or stopped, the role of the Patient Typology (on medication perspectives), and the impact of the patient-GP relationship in these decisions.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This cross-sectional survey study has two parts: Part A and Part B. Data collection for Part A will take place in nine countries, in which per country 10 GPs will recruit 10 older patients (≥65 years old) each (n = 900). Part B will be conducted in Switzerland only, in which an additional 35 GPs will recruit five patients each and respond to a questionnaire themselves, with questions about the patients' medications, their willingness to deprescribe those, and their patient-provider relationship. For both Part A and part B, a questionnaire will be used to assess the willingness of older patients with polypharmacy to have medications deprescribed and other relevant information. For Part B, this same questionnaire will have additional questions on the use of herbal and dietary supplements.

DISCUSSION

The international study design will allow comparisons of patient perspectives on deprescribing from different countries. We will collect information about willingness to have medications deprescribed by medication type and regarding herbal and dietary supplements, which adds important information to the literature on patients' preferences. In addition, GPs in Switzerland will also be surveyed, allowing us to compare GPs' and patients' views and preferences on stopping or reducing specific medications. Our findings will help to understand patients' attitudes towards deprescribing, contributing to improvements in the design and implementation of deprescribing interventions that are better tailored to patients' preferences.

Live well, die well – an international cohort study on experiences, concerns and preferences of patients in the last phase of life: the research protocol of the iLIVE study

Introduction

Adequately addressing the needs of patients at the end of life and their relatives is pivotal in preventing unnecessary suffering and optimising their quality of life. The purpose of the iLIVE study is to contribute to high-quality personalised care at the end of life in different countries and cultures, by investigating the experiences, concerns, preferences and use of care of terminally ill patients and their families.

Methods and analysis

The iLIVE study is an international cohort study in which patients with an estimated life expectancy of 6 months or less are followed up until they die. In total, 2200 patients will be included in 11 countries, that is, 200 per country. In addition, one relative per patient is invited to participate. All participants will be asked to fill in a questionnaire, at baseline and after 4 weeks. If a patient dies within 6 months of follow-up, the relative will be asked to fill in a post-bereavement questionnaire. Healthcare use in the last week of life will be evaluated as well; healthcare staff who attended the patient will be asked to fill in a brief questionnaire to evaluate the care that was provided. Qualitative interviews will be conducted with patients, relatives and healthcare professionals in all countries to gain more in-depth insights.

Ethics and dissemination

The cohort study has been approved by ethics committees and the institutional review boards (IRBs) of participating institutes in all countries. Results will be disseminated through the project website, publications in scientific journals and at conferences. Within the project, there will be a working group focusing on enhancing the engagement of the community at large with the reality of death and dying.

Trial registration number

NCT04271085.

Palliative Care: A Primary Care Pharmacist Perspective

The overview approaches pharmacy practice in palliative care from a global viewpoint and aims to provide insight into front-line pharmacist–patient relationships by sharing case studies and personal experiences.

Prescription trends at the end of life in a palliative care unit: observational study

Background

Symptomatic control is essential in palliative care, particularly in end-of-life, in which the pathophysiological changes that characterize this last phase of life strengthen the need to carry out an early therapeutic review. Hence, we aim to evaluate the prescribing pattern at a palliative care unit at two different time points: on admission and the day of the patient’s death.

Methods

Quantitative, analytic, longitudinal, retrospective and observational study. Participants were adult patients who were admitted and died in a palliative care unit, in Portugal. Sociodemographic, clinical and pharmacological data were collected, including frequencies and routes of administration of schedule prescribed drugs and rescue drugs, from the day of admission until the day of death.

Results

115 patients were included with an average age of 70.0 ± 12.9 years old, 53.9 were male, mostly referred by the Hospital Palliative Care Support Teams. The most common pathology was cancer, mainly in advanced stage. On admission, the median scheduled prescription was seven and “as needed” was three drugs. On the day of death, a decrease of prescriptions was observed. Opioids were always the most prescribed drugs. Near death, there was a higher tendency to prescribe butylscopolamine, midazolam, diazepam and levomepromazine. The most frequent route of drug administration was oral on admission and subcutaneous on the day of death.

Conclusions

Polypharmacy is a reality in palliative care despite specialist palliative care teams. A reduction of prescribed drugs was verified, essentially due less comorbidity-oriented drugs. Further studies are required to analyse the importance of Hospital Palliative Care Support Teams.

Residential Medication Management Reviews and continuous polypharmacy among older Australian women

Background Polypharmacy is an important consideration for the provision of Residential Medication Management Reviews (RMMRs) among older women given their enhanced risk of medication-related problems and admission to residential aged care (RAC). Objectives To determine the prevalence of the use of RMMRs among older women in RAC, and the association between RMMRs and polypharmacy, medications, and costs. Setting Older Australian women aged 79-84 years in 2005 who had at least one Medicare Benefits Schedule and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme record, received a service in aged care, and consented to data linkage. Methods Generalised estimating equations were used to determine the association between polypharmacy and RMMRs, while adjusting for confounding variables. Main outcome measures Prevalence of the use of RMMRs among older women in RAC, association between RMMRs and polypharmacy, medications, and costs. Results Most participants did not have continuous polypharmacy and did not receive RMMRs from 2005 [451 (67.4%)] until 2017 [666 (66.6%)]. Participants with continuous polypharmacy were 17% more likely to receive a RMMR (risk ratio 1.17; 95% confidence interval 1.11, 1.25). Participants in their final year of life and residing in outer regional/remote/very remote Australia were less likely to receive RMMRs. Out-of-pocket medication costs increased over time, and alendronate and aspirin were common contributors to polypharmacy among participants who received RMMRs. Conclusion Polypharmacy was associated with receiving RMMRs and around two-thirds of women who are entitled to a RMMR never received one. There is potential to improve the use of medicines by increasing awareness of the service among eligible individuals, their carers and health care professionals.

Barriers to effective prescribing in older adults: applying the theoretical domains framework in the ambulatory setting - a scoping review

BACKGROUND

As the population ages, potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in the older adults may become increasingly prevalent. This undermines patient safety and creates a potential source of major morbidity and mortality. Understanding the factors that influence prescribing behaviour may allow development of interventions to reduce PIP. The aim of this study is to apply the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to explore barriers to effective prescribing for older adults in the ambulatory setting.

METHODS

A scoping review was performed based on the five-stage methodological framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley. From 30 Aug 2018 to 5 Sep 2018, we conducted our search on PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Web of Science. We also searched five electronic journals, Google and Google Scholar to identify additional sources and grey literature. Two reviewers applied eligibility criteria to the title and abstract screening, followed by full text screening, before systematically charting the data.

RESULTS

A total of 5731 articles were screened. Twenty-nine studies met the selection criteria for qualitative analysis. We mapped our results using the 14-domain TDF, eventually identifying 10 domains of interest for barriers to effective prescribing. Of these, significant domains include physician-related factors such as "Knowledge", "Skills", and "Social/Professional Role and Identity"; issues with "Environmental Context and Resources"; and the impact of "Social Influences" and "Emotion" on prescribing behaviour.

CONCLUSION

The TDF elicited multiple domains which both independently and collectively lead to barriers to effective prescribing for older adults in the ambulatory setting. Changing the prescribing climate will thus require interventions targeting multiple stakeholders, including physicians, patients and hospital/clinic systems. Further work is needed to explore individual domains and guide development of frameworks to aid guide prescribing for older adults in the ambulatory setting.

TOP-ID: a Delphi technique-guided development of a prescription and deprescription tool for adults with intellectual disabilities

OBJECTIVES

Adults with an intellectual disability (AWID) are often polymedicated because of somatic and psychiatric health problems. Besides, they may display challenging behaviours, leading to off-label prescription of psychotropic drugs, without efficacy and with numerous adverse effects. In this context, a prescription/deprescription tool (Tool for Optimising Prescription in Intellectual Disability/TOP-ID) was developed to improve the care of AWID. This paper describes how TOP-ID was designed.

DESIGN

Four-step consensus-based process involving a review of the literature, eight semistructured interviews and a two-round Delphi process.

SETTING

Seventeen general practices and university and general hospitals from Belgium, France and Switzerland.

PARTICIPANTS

Eighteen French-speaking physicians from different domains of expertise participated in the Delphi process.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

For the Delphi iteration process, consensus was defined as at least a 65% agreement between the experts.

RESULTS

Two rounds were needed for the Delphi process. Eighty-one items of the tool were submitted to 18 out of 35 recruited French-speaking experts during the first round. Sixty-nine per cent of the items reached a rate of agreement of 65% or more in that round. Thirteen questions were reformulated and resubmitted for the second Delphi iteration round. All of the statements reached a rate of agreement of 65% or more in the second round.

CONCLUSION

TOP-ID is the first prescription-deprescription tool developed specifically for AWIDs in French. It is intended to help prescribers document patient care in order to reduce prescription errors and to improve safety. The next steps of the project include the development of an electronic version of TOP-ID and a utility study.

What do older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy think about deprescribing? The LESS study - a primary care-based survey

Background

Multimorbidity and polypharmacy are very common in older adults in primary care. Ideally, general practitioners (GPs), should regularly review medication lists to identify inappropriate medication(s) and, where appropriate, deprescribe. However, it remains challenging to deprescribe given time constraints and few recommendations from guidelines. Further, patient related barriers and enablers to deprescribing have to be accounted for. The aim of this study was to identify barriers and enablers to deprescribing as reported by older adults with polypharmacy and multimorbidity.

Methods

We conducted a survey among participants aged ≥70 years, with multimorbidity (≥3 chronic conditions) and polypharmacy (≥5 chronic medications). We invited Swiss GPs, to recruit eligible patients who then completed a paper-based survey on demographics, medications and chronic conditions. We used the revised Patients’ Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire and added twelve additional Likert scale questions and two open-ended questions to assess barriers and enablers towards deprescribing, which we coded and categorized into meaningful themes.

Result

Sixty four Swiss GPs consented to recruit 5–6 patients each and returned 300 participant responses. Participants were 79.1 years (SD 5.7), 47% female, 34% lived alone, and 86% managed their medications themselves. Sixty-seven percent of participants took 5–9 regular medicines and 24% took ≥10 medicines. The majority of participants (77%) were willing to deprescribe one or more of their medicines if their doctor said it was possible. There was no association with sex, age or the number of medicines and willingness to deprescribe. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, there was a strong positive association between willingness to deprescribe and saying that because they have a good relationship with their GP, they would feel that deprescribing was safe OR 11.3 (95% CI: 4.64–27.3) and agreeing that they would be willing to deprescribe if new studies showed an avoidable risk OR 8.0 (95% CI 3.79–16.9). From the open questions, the most mentioned barriers towards deprescribing were patients feeling well on their current medicines and being convinced that they need all their medicines.

Conclusions

Most older adults with polypharmacy are willing to deprescribe. GPs may be able to increase deprescribing by building trust with their patients and communicating evidence about the risks of medication use.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-020-01843-x.

The evolution of an evidence based intervention designed to improve prescribing and reduce polypharmacy in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy in primary care (SPPiRE)

Introduction

By the time an intervention is ready for evaluation in a definitive RCT the context of the evidence base may have evolved. To avoid research waste, it is imperative that intervention design and evaluation is an adaptive process incorporating emerging evidence and novel concepts. The aim of this study is to describe changes that were made to an evidence based intervention at the protocol stage of the definitive RCT to incorporate emerging evidence.

Methods

The original evidence based intervention, a GP delivered web guided medication review, was modified in a five step process:Identification of core components of the original intervention.Literature review.Modification of the intervention.Pilot study.Final refinements. A framework, developed in public health research, was utilised to describe the modification process.

Results

The population under investigation changed from older people with a potentially inappropriate prescription (PIP) to older people with significant polypharmacy, a proxy marker for complex multimorbidity. An assessment of treatment priorities and brown bag medication review, with a focus on deprescribing were incorporated into the original intervention. The number of repeat medicines was added as a primary outcome measure as were additional secondary patient reported outcome measures to assess treatment burden and attitudes towards deprescribing.

Conclusions

A framework was used to systematically describe how and why the original intervention was modified, allowing the new intervention to build upon an effective and robustly developed intervention but also to be relevant in the context of the current evidence base.

Associations of Polypharmacy and Inappropriate Medications with Adverse Outcomes in Older Adults with Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy (PP) and potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) are highly prevalent in older adults with cancer. This study systematically reviews the associations of PP and/or PIM with outcomes and, through a meta-analysis, obtains estimates of postoperative outcomes associated with PP in this population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials using standardized terms for concepts of PP, PIM, and cancer. Eligible studies included cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, meta-analyses, and clinical trials which examined outcomes associated with PP and/or PIM and included older adults with cancer. A random effects model included studies in which definitions of PP were consistent to examine the association of PP with postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Forty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria. PP was defined as five or more medications in 57% of the studies. Commonly examined outcomes included chemotherapy toxicities, postoperative complications, functional decline, hospitalization, and overall survival. PP was associated with chemotherapy toxicities (4/9 studies), falls (3/3 studies), functional decline (3/3 studies), and overall survival (2/11 studies). A meta-analysis of four studies indicated an association between PP (≥5 medications) and postoperative complications (overall odds ratio, 1.3; 95% confidence interval [1.3-2.8]). PIM was associated with adverse outcomes in 3 of 11 studies.

CONCLUSION

PP is associated with postoperative complications, chemotherapy toxicities, and physical and functional decline. Only three studies showed an association between PIM and outcomes. However, because of inconsistent definitions, heterogeneous populations, and variable study designs, these associations should be further investigated in prospective studies.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) are prevalent in older adults with cancer. This systematic review summarizes the associations of polypharmacy and PIM with health outcomes in older patients with cancer. Polypharmacy and PIM have been associated with postoperative complications, frailty, falls, medication nonadherence, chemotherapy toxicity, and mortality. These findings emphasize the prognostic importance of careful medication review and identification of PIM by oncology teams. They also underscore the need to develop and test interventions to address polypharmacy and PIM in older patients with cancer, with the goal of improving outcomes in these patients.

Older Medicare Beneficiaries Frequently Continue Medications with Limited Benefit Following Hospice Admission

BACKGROUND

The use of medications not relieving symptoms or maximizing quality of life should be minimized following hospice enrollment.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the frequency of and predictive factors for continuation of medications with limited benefit after hospice admission among those admitted for cancer- and non-cancer-related causes.

DESIGN

Cohort study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare linked database.

PATIENTS

Medicare Part D-enrolled beneficiaries 66 years and older who were admitted to and died under hospice care between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2013 (N = 70,035).

MAIN MEASURES

Patients were followed from hospice enrollment through death for Part D dispensing of limited benefit medications (LBMs) they had used in the 6 months prior to hospice admission, including anti-hyperlipidemics, anti-hypertensives, oral anti-diabetics, anti-platelets, anti-dementia medications, anti-osteoporotic medications, and proton pump inhibitors. The proportion of patients continuing an LBM after hospice admission was evaluated. Adjusted relative risks (RRs) were estimated for factors associated with LBM continuation.

KEY RESULTS

Overall, 29.8% and 30.5% of patients admitted to hospice for a cancer- and non-cancer-related cause, respectively, continued at least one LBM after hospice admission. Anti-dementia medications were continued most frequently (29.3%) while anti-osteoporotic medications were continued least often (14.1%). Compared to home hospice, LBM continuation was greater in hospice patients residing in skilled nursing (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.20-1.29), non-skilled nursing (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.25-1.32), and assisted living facilities (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.24-1.32). Patients with hospice stays ≥ 180 days were more likely to continue at least one LBM compared to those with stays of 1 week or less (RR 13.11, 95% CI 12.25-14.02).

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of Medicare hospice beneficiaries continued to receive LBMs following hospice enrollment. Providers should evaluate the necessity of continuing non-palliative medications at the end of life through a careful, patient-centric consideration of their potential risks and benefits.

Deintensification in older patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review of approaches, rates and outcomes

AIM

To assess deintensification approaches and rates and evaluate the harm and benefits of deintensification with antidiabetic medication and other therapies among older people (≥ 65 years) with type 2 diabetes with or without cardiometabolic conditions.

METHODS

We identified relevant studies in a literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane databases to 30 October 2018. Data were extracted on baseline characteristics, details on deintensification and outcomes, and was synthesized using a narrative approach.

RESULTS

Ten studies (observational cohorts and interventional studies) with data on 26 558 patients with comorbidities were eligible. Deintensification approaches included complete withdrawal, discontinuation, reducing dosage, conversion, or substitution of at least one medication, but the majority of studies were based on complete withdrawal or discontinuation of antihyperglycaemic medication. Rates of deintensification approaches ranged from 13.4%-75%. The majority of studies reported no deterioration in HbA1c levels, hypoglycaemic episodes, falls or hospitalizations on deintensification. On adverse events and mortality, no significant differences were observed among the comparison groups in the majority of studies.

CONCLUSION

Available but limited evidence suggests that the benefits of deintensification outweigh the harm in older people with type 2 diabetes with or without comorbidities. Given the heterogeneity of patients with diabetes, further research is warranted on which deintensification approaches are appropriate and beneficial for each specific patient population.

Deprescribing in palliative care

The use of multiple medications is common in palliative care, putting patients at risk of adverse events and a high tablet burden. Deprescribing is the process of reviewing and stopping potentially inappropriate medications in order to improve quality of life. Barriers to deprescribing exist meaning many patients will take multiple medications despite being in the final months of life. The OncPal deprescribing guideline is a useful tool to support the process for patients with a limited life expectancy. There is evidence for the safety of stopping certain medications, particularly those aimed at primary prevention. A systematic process of reviewing individual medications and their appropriateness is recommended.

Prescription and deprescription of medications for older adults receiving palliative care during the last 3 months of life: a single-center retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Near the end of life, drugs to ensure comfort and improve quality of life should be prioritized, and unnecessary drugs should be avoided. The aim was to assess the evolution and quality of drug therapy throughout the last 3 months of life of older adults in need of palliative care.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective cohort study included older adults (≥ 65 years) who died in a teaching hospital between 1 January 2014 and 30 June 2014 and had been identified as patients in need of palliative care in their last 3 months of life. Drugs were collected from electronic medical records and defined as 'unnecessary' or 'essential' based on a review of the literature.

RESULTS

A total of 149 patients were included [age: 82.1 (SD 8.6) years, women: 46.3%]. The mean number of medications varied from 6.7 (SD 3.3) drugs 90 days before death, to 7.5 (SD 4.1) 7 days before death, to 5.6 (SD 3.6) on the day of death. During the final week of life, one additional prescription of essential drugs was observed for 75.2% of patients and 79.3% of patients had at least one unnecessary drug deprescribed. The most prescribed and deprescribed drug classes were, respectively, analgesics (56.4%) and antithrombotic agents (38.2%) during the last week of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Near the end of life, medication therapy is adapted to the goals of palliative care. However, this only occurs during the last week of life. Earlier transition to palliative care is necessary to avoid exposure to unnecessary drugs.

The deprescribing rainbow: a conceptual framework highlighting the importance of patient context when stopping medication in older people

The area of "deprescribing" has rapidly expanded in recent years as a positive intervention to reduce inappropriate polypharmacy and improve health outcomes for (older) people with multimorbidity. While our understanding of deprescribing as a process has greatly improved and existing approaches all have patient-centered elements, there is still limited literature exploring the importance of the individual patient context in deprescribing decision-making. This is clearly an important consideration to ensure that any deprescribing approach is ethical, respectful, and successful. To address this gap in the literature, we have developed a conceptual framework in the form of a rainbow - with five different deprescribing determinants - and place the person at the center of the deprescribing process. This framework is informed by literature on patient-centered care for older people and people with multimorbidity. We illustrate the potential application of this framework to a complex patient case to highlight the importance of the different clinical, psychological, social, financial and physical deprescribing determinants, and how this approach could be adopted by those working in clinical practice.

How general practitioners would deprescribe in frail oldest-old with polypharmacy - the LESS study

BACKGROUND

Many oldest-old (> 80-years) with multimorbidity and polypharmacy are at high risk of inappropriate use of medication, but we know little about whether and how GPs would deprescribe, especially in the frail oldest-old. We aimed to determine whether, how, and why Swiss GPs deprescribe for this population.

METHODS

GPs took an online survey that presented case-vignettes of a frail oldest-old patient with and without history of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and asked if they would deprescribe any of seven medications. We calculated percentages of GPs willing to deprescribe at least one medication in the case with CVD and compared these with the case without CVD using paired t-tests. We also included open-ended questions to capture reasons for deprescribing and asked which factors could influence their decision to deprescribe by asking for their agreement on a 5-point-Likert-scale.

RESULTS

Of the 282 GPs we invited, 157 (56%) responded: 73% were men; mean age was 56. In the case-vignette without CVD, 98% of GPs deprescribed at least one medication (usually cardiovascular preventive medications) stating it had no indication nor benefit. They would lower the dose or prescribe pain medication as needed to reduce side effects. Their response was much the same when the patient had a history of CVD. GPs reported they were influenced by 'risk' and 'benefit' of medications, 'quality of life', and 'life expectancy', and prioritized the patient's wishes and priorities when deprescribing.

CONCLUSION

Swiss GPs were willing to deprescribe cardiovascular preventive medication when it lacked indication but tended to retain pain medication. Developing tools for GPs to assist them in balancing the risks and benefits of medication in the context of patient values may improve deprescribing activities in practice.

Supporting prescribing in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy in primary care (SPPiRE): a cluster randomised controlled trial protocol and pilot

Background

Multimorbidity, defined as the presence of at least two chronic conditions, becomes increasingly common in older people and is associated with poorer health outcomes and significant polypharmacy. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) recently published a multimorbidity guideline that advises providing an individualised medication review for all people prescribed 15 or more repeat medicines. This study incorporates this guideline and aims to assess the effectiveness of a complex intervention designed to support general practitioners (GPs) to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing and consider deprescribing in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy in Irish primary care.

Methods

This study is a cluster randomised controlled trial, involving 30 general practices and 450 patients throughout Ireland. Practices will be eligible to participate if they have at least 300 patients aged 65 years and over on their patient panel and if they use either one of the two predominant practice management software systems in use in Ireland. Using a software patient finder tool, practices will identify and recruit patients aged 65 years and over, who are prescribed at least 15 repeat medicines. Once baseline data collection is complete, practices will be randomised using minimisation by an independent third party to either intervention or control. Given the nature of the intervention, it is not possible to blind participants or study personnel. GPs in intervention practices will receive login details to a website where they will access training videos and a template for conducting an individualised structured medication review, which they will undertake with each of their included patients. Control practices will deliver usual care over the 6-month study period. Primary outcome measures pertain to the individual patient level and are the proportion of patients with any PIP and the number of repeat medicines.

Discussion

Disease-specific approaches in multimorbidity may be inappropriate and result in fragmented and poorly co-ordinated care. This pragmatic study is evaluating a complex intervention that is relevant across multiple conditions and addresses potential concerns around medicines safety in this vulnerable group of patients. The potential for system-wide implementation will be explored with a parallel mixed methods process evaluation.

Trial registration

ISRCTN: 12752680, Registered 20 October 2016.

Use of Preventive Medication in Patients With Limited Life Expectancy: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Optimal prescribing in patients with limited life expectancy (LLE) remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

This study systematically reviews the published literature regarding the use of preventive medication in patients with reduced life expectancy.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL). Articles published in English from January 1995 to December 2015 were retrieved for analysis to identify peer-reviewed, observational studies assessing use of preventive medications in patients with LLE. Inclusion criteria were: patients with a LLE (less than or equal to two years); prescribed/used preventive medications.

RESULTS

Of the 15 studies meeting our eligibility criteria, six were from inpatient hospital settings, five in palliative care, three in nursing homes, and one in community settings. The most common life-limiting illnesses described in the studies were cancer (n = 6), cardiovascular diseases (n = 4), dementia and cognitive impairment (n = 2), and other life-limiting illnesses (n = 3). Lipid-lowering medications, especially the statins were frequently prescribed preventive medication followed by antiplatelets, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers, anti-osteoporosis medications, and calcium channel blockers. Only four studies reported the instances of medication withdrawal.

CONCLUSION

Patients continue to receive medications that are not prescribed as symptomatic treatment despite having a LLE. Very few rigorous studies have been conducted on minimizing preventive medications in patients with LLE, and expert opinion varies on medication optimization at the end of life. A consensus guideline that addresses this gap is of paramount importance.

Use of Medications of Questionable Benefit During the Last Year of Life of Older Adults With Dementia

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the prevalence and factors associated with the use of medications of questionable benefit throughout the final year of life of older adults who died with dementia.

DESIGN

Register-based, longitudinal cohort study.

SETTING

Entire Sweden.

PARTICIPANTS

All older adults (≥75 years) who died with dementia between 2007 and 2013 (n = 120,067).

MEASUREMENTS

Exposure to medications of questionable benefit was calculated for each of the last 12 months before death, based on longitudinal data from the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register.

RESULTS

The proportion of older adults with dementia who received at least 1 medication of questionable benefit decreased from 38.6% 12 months before death to 34.7% during the final month before death (P < .001 for trend). Among older adults with dementia who used at least 1 medication of questionable benefit 12 months before death, 74.8% remained exposed until their last month of life. Living in an institution was independently associated with a 15% reduction of the likelihood to receive ≥1 medication of questionable benefit during the last month before death (odds ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.88-0.83). Antidementia drugs accounted for one-fifth of the total number of medications of questionable benefit. Lipid-lowering agents were used by 8.3% of individuals during their final month of life (10.2% of community-dwellers and 6.6% of institutionalized people, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Clinicians caring for older adults with advanced dementia should be provided with reliable tools to help them reduce the burden of medications of questionable benefit near the end of life.

The Role of Patient Preferences in Deprescribing

Polypharmacy and the use of inappropriate medications has become an increasing problem globally. Deprescribing has gained attention as a means to rationalize medication use. Deprescribing interventions have been shown to be generally feasible and safe; in the few studies in which patient preferences are assessed, such interventions also seem to be acceptable to patients. Qualitative studies suggest that patients are interested in reducing medications, may need education about their medications to facilitate deprescribing, and highly value communication with their providers around deprescribing. This article focuses on patient preferences for deprescribing and highlights practical recommendations to overcome barriers to deprescribing.

Renal Insufficiency and Medication in Nursing Home Residents. A Cross-Sectional Study (IMREN)

BACKGROUND

Nursing home residents often suffer from a multiplicity of medical conditions and take many different drugs. Many drugs are eliminated via the kidneys and thus require dose adjustment in patients with renal insufficiency. This is the first study to address the prevalence of renal insufficiency among nursing home residents in Germany, and the extent to which such persons take drugs that are contraindicated or incorrectly dosed because of renal insufficiency.

METHODS

We carried out a cross-sectional study in nursing homes in the German regions of Bremen and Lower Saxony. Data were collected by nursing staff and given to us anonymously. Whenever the nursing home data did not include a current creatinine value, the patient's general practitioner was asked to supply this value. The estimated creatinine clearance (eCCr) was calculated with the Cockcroft-Gault formula.

RESULTS

852 residents of 21 nursing homes were included in the study; eCCr values were obtainable for 685 (80.4%) of them (average age, 83.3 years; 75.2% female). 48.2% of these patients (95% confidence interval [CI] 41.8-54.5) had moderate renal insufficiency (eCCr 59-30 mL/min), and 15.5% (95% CI 12.4-18.6) had severe renal insufficiency (eCCr <30 mL/min). 19.7% were regularly taking at least one medication that was contraindicated or incorrectly dosed in the light of renal insufficiency. Predictors for such inappropriate drug use were advanced age, female sex, arterial hypertension, and polypharmacy. The drugs that were most often inappropriately used were metformin, ramipril, and potassium chloride.

CONCLUSION

Nursing home residents often suffer from renal insufficiency and should therefore have their creatinine levels measured regularly. A knowledge of the creatinine level is a prerequisite for the proper adjustment of drug doses (if necessary). A practical and compact summary of dose-adjustment recommendations for patients with renal insufficiency would be desirable but is not yet available.

An Ecological Approach to Reducing Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use: Canadian Deprescribing Network

Polypharmacy is growing in Canada, along with adverse drug events and drug-related costs. Part of the solution may be deprescribing, the planned and supervised process of dose reduction or stopping of medications that may be causing harm or are no longer providing benefit. Deprescribing can be a complex process, involving the intersection of patients, health care providers, and organizational and policy factors serving as enablers or barriers. This article describes the justification, theoretical foundation, and process for developing a Canadian Deprescribing Network (CaDeN), a network of individuals, organizations, and decision-makers committed to promoting the appropriate use of medications and non-pharmacological approaches to care, especially among older people in Canada. CaDeN will deploy multiple levels of action across multiple stakeholder groups simultaneously in an ecological approach to health system change. CaDeN proposes a unique model that might be applied both in national settings and for different transformational challenges in health care.

Deprescribing: a primary care perspective

Polypharmacy is an increasing and global issue affecting primary care. Although sometimes appropriate, polypharmacy can also be problematic, leading to a range of adverse consequences. Deprescribing is the process of supervised withdrawal of an inappropriate medication and has the potential to reduce some of the problems associated with polypharmacy. It is a complex and sensitive process. We examine the issue of deprescribing from the perspective of primary care. Key steps in the deprescribing process are a review of medications and corresponding indications, consideration of harms, assessment of eligibility for discontinuation, prioritisation of medications and implementation of a stopping plan with appropriate monitoring. Patient involvement is a key feature of this process. Deprescribing should be considered in the context of end-of-life care and medication safety, but approaches are also required to identify other situations where deprescribing is appropriate. General practitioners are well positioned to facilitate deprescribing, usually through formal medication review, with decisions informed by a range of other healthcare professionals. Guidelines are available that help guide these processes. A range of studies have explored attitudes towards deprescribing; patients are generally supportive of the concept, although clinician views are varied. The successful implementation of deprescribing strategies still requires important patient and clinician barriers to be overcome, and clinical trial evidence of effectiveness and safety is essential.

Review of structured guides for deprescribing

Avoiding inappropriate polypharmacy has become increasingly recognised as a safety imperative for older patient care. Deprescribing is an active process of reviewing all medications being used by individual patients that prompts clinicians to consider which medications have unfavourable risk-benefit trade-offs in the context of illness severity, advanced age, multi-morbidity, physical and emotional capacity, life expectancy, care goals and personal preferences. Structured guides to deprescribing include algorithms, flow charts or tables which are patient-directed and aim to guide the clinician through sequential steps in deciding which medications should be targeted for discontinuation. In this narrative review, we describe seven structured deprescribing guides whose stated purpose included the reduction of polypharmacy, their use was not restricted to a single drug or drug class and they had undergone some form of efficacy testing. There was considerable heterogeneity in guide design and content, with some guides constituting little more than a set of principles while others entail detailed processes and sub-steps which addressed multiple determinants of drug appropriateness. Evidence of effectiveness for each guide was limited in that none have been evaluated in randomised controlled trials, that pilot or feasibility studies have involved relatively small patient samples, that intra-rater and inter-rater reliabilities have not been determined and that most have been studied in hospital settings. Which is most useful to clinicians is unknown in the absence of head-to-head comparisons. While most guides have face validity, more research is needed for determining effectiveness and ease of use in routine clinical practice, especially in primary care settings.

Impact of medication review, within a shared decision-making framework, on deprescribing in people living in care homes

Objectives

The key objectives of this study were to quantify extent of prescribing, reasons for deprescribing, common therapeutic groups of medicines deprescribed and adverse events.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was carried out on a quality improvement project where 422 care home residents in 20 care homes received a medicines optimisation review with a pharmacist and other members of the healthcare team (general medical practitioner, care home nurse). Data on number, type and cost of medicines were collected. Statistical analysis was performed to test for differences between pharmacist-only review and the pharmacist plus general practitioner (GP), and to identify any correlation between the original number of medicines and the number of medicines stopped.

Results

Of the 422 patients reviewed, 298 (70.6%) had at least one medicine stopped with 704 medicines being stopped. This represented 19.5% of the medicines originally prescribed (3602 medicines). There was no statistically significant difference between pharmacist only and pharmacist plus GP in terms of stopping medicines. The main groups of medicines stopped were laxatives, skin products and bone protection. There was weak correlation between the original number of medicines prescribed and the number stopped.

Conclusions

This study has shown that medicines optimisation reviews can lead to a reduction in polypharmacy for care home residents through a deprescribing process. Patients' medicine regimens were simplified and optimised while making financial significant savings for the National Health Service.

Blood pressure evaluation and review of antihypertensive medication in patients with life limiting illness

Background Patients with life limiting illness commonly have multiple co-morbidities that require the use of complex, costly pharmacotherapy. One such example is using medications to treat hypertension in life limiting illness. Objective To: (1) assess the prevalence of previously documented hypertension and associated blood pressure in a cohort of patients with life limiting illness; and, (2) assess the appropriateness of antihypertensive medication in this patient group. Method This was a single centre study at a tertiary, specialist palliative care centre in Northern England. Electronic medical notes were reviewed and data were extracted. Antihypertensive medication was assessed for appropriateness using a conceptual framework. Results A total number of 54 patients were included in the study. Twenty six (48.1 %) had previously documented hypertension: the mean blood pressure of which was 122/65 mmHg (SD 17.0/10.5), while for the normotensive patients it was 122/73 mmHg (SD 21.0/11.6). Of the 26 patients using antihypertensive medication, 25 were assessed as using the medication inappropriately. Conclusions The blood pressure for patients with previously documented hypertension who access specialist palliative care day services is commonly below the NICE target threshold. The majority of these patients are prescribed antihypertensive medications inappropriately.

The potential for deprescribing in care home residents with Type 2 diabetes

Background Type 2 diabetes is a common diagnosis in care home residents that is associated with potentially inappropriate prescribing and thus risk of additional suffering. Previous studies found that diabetes medicines can be safely withdrawn in care home residents, encouraging further investigation of the potential for deprescribing amongst these patients. Objectives Describe comorbidities and medicine use in care home residents with Type 2 diabetes; identify number of potentially inappropriate medicines prescribed for these residents using a medicines optimisation tool; assess clinical applicability of the tool. Setting Thirty care homes for older people, East Anglia, UK. Method Data on diagnoses and medicines were extracted from medical records of 826 residents. Potentially inappropriate medicines were identified using the tool 'Optimising Safe and Appropriate Medicines Use'. Twenty percent of results were validated by a care home physician. Main outcome measure Number of potentially inappropriate medicines. Results The 106 residents with Type 2 diabetes had more comorbidities and prescriptions than those without. Over 90 % of residents with Type 2 diabetes had at least one potentially inappropriate medication. The most common was absence of valid indication. The physician unreservedly endorsed 39 % of the suggested deprescribing, and would consider discontinuing all but one of the remaining medicines following access to additional information. Conclusion UK care home residents with Type 2 diabetes had an increased burden of comorbidities and prescriptions. The majority of these patients were prescribed potentially inappropriate medicines. Validation by a care home physician supported the clinical applicability of the medicines optimisation tool.

'I don't think I'd be frightened if the statins went': a phenomenological qualitative study exploring medicines use in palliative care patients, carers and healthcare professionals

Background

There is a growing body of evidence suggesting patients with life-limiting illness use medicines inappropriately and unnecessarily. In this context, the perspective of patients, their carers and the healthcare professionals responsible for prescribing and monitoring their medication is important for developing deprescribing strategies. The aim of this study was to explore the lived experience of patients, carers and healthcare professionals in the context of medication use in life-limiting illness.

Methods

In-depth interviews, using a phenomenological approach: methods of transcendental phenomenology were used for the patient and carer interviews, while hermeneutic phenomenology was used for the healthcare professional interviews.

Results

The study highlighted that medication formed a significant part of a patient’s day-to-day routine; this was also apparent for their carers who took on an active role-as a gatekeeper of care-in managing medication. Patients described the experience of a point in which, in their disease journey, they placed less importance on taking certain medications; healthcare professionals also recognize this and refer it as a ‘transition’. This point appeared to occur when the patient became accepting of their illness and associated life expectancy. There was also willingness by patients, carers and healthcare professionals to review and alter the medication used by patients in the context of life-limiting illness.

Conclusions

There is a need to develop deprescribing strategies for patients with life-limiting illness. Such strategies should seek to establish patient expectations, consider the timing of the discussion about ceasing treatment and encourage the involvement of other stakeholders in the decision-making progress.