Potential costs of inappropriate use of proton pump inhibitors

Inappropriate use of proton pump inhibitors in patients with liver cirrhosis: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely prescribed for acid-related disorders; however, concerns have emerged regarding their misuse, particularly in patients with liver cirrhosis. This study aimed to assess the appropriateness of PPI prescriptions in patients with cirrhosis and to identify factors contributing to their overutilization in this patient population.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, 1000 patients with cirrhosis receiving PPIs were enrolled. Data on demographics, clinical parameters, and endoscopic findings were collected, and indications for PPI therapy were assessed according to established guidelines.

RESULTS

Among patients with cirrhosis, 60.5% were prescribed PPIs, with pantoprazole being the most prescribed (55.7%). Inappropriate PPI use was observed in 53.6% of the patients, mainly because of lacking an approved indication (78.54%) or exceeding the recommended treatment duration (21.46%). Causes contributing to misuse included prolonged PPI use postendoscopic band ligation (29.1%), extended treatment for functional dyspepsia (21.46%), failure to discontinue PPIs upon hospital discharge (17.54%), using PPIs for preventing portal hypertensive gastropathy (PHG) or variceal bleeding (16.42%), and stress ulcer prophylaxis in non-ICU patients (15.86%). Multivariate analysis identified independent predictors of inappropriate PPI use, including Child classification C, Mayo End-Stage Liver Disease score greater than 18, hepatocellular carcinoma, and previous variceal bleeding, whereas hematemesis was identified as an independent predictor of appropriate use.

CONCLUSION

This study underscores the prevalent inappropriate prescription of PPIs in patients with liver cirrhosis, particularly in those with advanced liver disease or a history of variceal bleeding. Enhancing prescribing practices and adhering to evidence-based guidelines are essential to mitigate the risks associated with PPI misuse in patients with cirrhosis.

Proton pump inhibitors and the risk of gastric cancer: a systematic review, evidence synthesis and life course epidemiology perspective

OBJECTIVES

Since proton pump inhibitors (PPI) have been introduced, many concerns were raised regarding potential gastric carcinogenicity. We aim to summarise and weigh the epidemiological evidence and address possible causality.

DESIGN

Systematic literature review, evidence synthesis and life-course assessment.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane database (from inception up to October 2024), and back- and forward citation tracking (Web of Science).

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Original studies and quantitative evidence syntheses assessing the association between PPIs and gastric cancer in humans, without language restrictions.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Study design, definitions (and participant numbers) of PPI use and gastric cancer, study characteristics (setting, period, follow-up, lag-time), age and sex distribution presented in tables and evidence mapping.

RESULTS

We identified 33 original studies, 21 meta-analyses, three umbrella meta-analyses, one individual patient data meta-analysis and a Markov model (2006-2023). PPIs were consistently associated with an increased gastric cancer risk with 20/21 meta-analyses reporting pooled relative risks between 1.3 and 2.9. Available trials were underpowered. Reverse causation/protopathic bias, residual confounding (by indication) and lag time seem the largest methodological challenges, as well as disentangling the effects of Helicobacter pylori and its' eradication. Insufficient data are available on age and sex-specific risks, with no studies specifically addressing PPIs in young populations. We hypothesise a sensitive-period exposure model, in which PPI use during pregnancy and early life may be particularly damaging regarding long-term cancer risk. An exploration of Swedish cancer incidence data suggests potential cohort effects as overall gastric cancer risk decreased over time (1970-2022). The risk has increased in young (<40 years) men since the early 2000s, ~10 years after the introduction of Helicobacter pylori eradication and PPIs.

CONCLUSION

Although for older individuals with valid indications, the gastric cancer risk related to PPI use may be limited, we do argue for a more rational and evidence-supported use of PPIs in young populations.

Interventional pharmacoepdemiology: design and evaluation of interventions to improve prescribing

Despite the value of modern therapeutics, many obstacles prevent their optimal use. Overuse, underuse, and misuse are common, resulting in morbidity and mortality affecting billions of individuals across the world. Pharmacoepidemiology provides important insights into drug utilization, safety, and effectiveness in large populations, and it is an important method to identify opportunities to improve the value of therapeutics in clinical practice. However, for these opportunities to be realized, interventions to improve prescribing must be developed, evaluated, and implemented in the real world. We provide an overview of this process, focusing especially on how such interventions can be designed and deployed to maximize scalability, adoption, and impact. Prescribing represents a complex behavior with barriers and enablers, and interventions to improve prescribing will be most successful when developed, piloted and refined to maximize provider and patient acceptability. Carefully developed evaluations of interventions are also critical, and varied methods are available to empirically evaluate the intended and potential unintended consequences of interventions. With illustrative examples from the peer-reviewed literature, we provide readers with an overview of approaches to the essential and growing field of interventional pharmacoepidemiology. This article is part of a Special Collection on Pharmacoepidemiology.

Trends in Proton Pump Inhibitor Use in Sweden by Sex and Age: A Drug Utilisation Study

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most popular drugs worldwide. Yet, there are concerns on long-term safety and poor adherence to prescription guidelines. Off-label use in children and increasing maintenance use in older adults may be particularly worrisome.

OBJECTIVES

To assess differences in PPI use by age, sex calendar year and PPI type, and to explore potential underlying indications (ulcerogenic drugs, and indications) in Sweden.

METHODS

Proton pump inhibitor drug utilisation study based on the Swedish nationwide prescribed drug (2006-2023) and patient registries (2006-2022).

RESULTS

Proton pump inhibitors were used by 14.4% (women) and 10.5% (men) of adults; and 1.0-1.5% of children and adolescents (aged < 20 years). Proton pump inhibitor use was higher in women in all age-groups except small children (aged < 5 years). Proton pump inhibitor use has increased in all age groups, especially in young children (aged < 10 years) and the oldest groups (aged > 65 years). Proton pump inhibitor users aged > 85 years filled most prescriptions with an annual average of 9.5 (men), 11.6 (women) prescriptions. Most prescriptions were for omeprazole and esomeprazole: 63.7% and 23.5% in adults; 23.5% and 44.7% in children (2023). Prescriptions for other drugs for peptic ulcers/reflux became rare, with 99% of prescriptions in this category being PPIs by 2023. Gastro-intestinal diagnoses were predominantly recorded in men, became less prevalent and only explained part of PPI use, while ulcerogenic drugs were common (particularly in women), suggesting PPIs are regularly used for gastroprotection.

CONCLUSION

Proton pump inhibitor use has doubled in children and increased 50% in adults over the study period, in both sexes, while recorded gastrointestinal indications decreased. Alternative therapies were rarely prescribed in Sweden.

Implementation of Guideline-Based Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors for Perioperative Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis: A Pre-Post Study Guided by CFIR-ERIC

Background

The overuse and misuse of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in perioperative patients for stress ulcers prophylactic (SUP) is crucial. This study evaluated the impact of a Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (CFIR-ERIC)-guided intervention on the rational use of PPIs in a perioperative setting.

Methods

A single-center pre-post study was conducted at Beijing Chaoyang Hospital between April and November 2023. All hospitalized patients who used perioperative PPIs for SUP were included. Cases post-intervention were defined as the intervention group and were propensity score-matched with pre-intervention cases, which was defined as the control group. The intervention strategies were developed by following the updated CFIR framework and employing CFIR-ERIC strategies. Outcomes included rational use of PPIs, reasons for irrational use, total hospitalization and drug costs, PPI duration, costs, and average defined daily dose.

Results

1122 cases were included in the intervention group and control group after propensity score matching, respectively. The intervention group showed significant improved rate of rational PPI use (81.7% vs 42.0%, p<0.001). Rates of non-indication use, inappropriate dosage and administration, drug selection, and administration route were significantly reduced (all p<0.05). Coagulation disorders or anticoagulant/antiplatelet treatment, severe trauma or multiple injuries, severe infection or sepsis were the three most prevalent severe risk factors among patients, with 46.7% and 29.5% of the two groups, respectively. We found no significant differences between the two groups in total hospitalization costs (¥55,672.84 vs ¥57,021.73, p=0.621) and total drug costs (¥3005.38 vs ¥3260.98, p=0.206). Additionally, PPI costs (¥7.44 vs ¥93.70, p<0.001) and defined daily dose (7.00 vs 8.00, p<0.001) were significantly lower in the intervention group. We also observed a downward trend in PPI duration (6.00 days vs 5.00 days, p=0.075).

Conclusion

The CFIR-ERIC-guided intervention effectively improved the rational use of PPIs for perioperative SUP, resulting in significant reductions in both the PPI duration and costs.

Association of Physicians of India Consensus Recommendations for Vonoprazan in Management of Acid Peptic Disorders

The suppression of gastric acid secretion has long been the cornerstone of treatment for acid peptic disorders (APDs). Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have played a central role in managing these conditions, but their effectiveness can be hindered by notable limitations such as refractoriness or treatment failure due to inadequate acid suppression in some gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients, nonadherence to prescribed regimens due to the complexity of dosing, variability of response, and nocturnal acid breakthrough, etc. Vonoprazan is a first-in-class potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB), recently introduced in India and also approved in several countries such as Japan, South Korea, and the USA. Extensive clinical evidence suggests that vonoprazan offers more potent acid suppression than PPIs. This consensus from the Association of Physicians of India (API) has been developed with the objective of providing key recommendations for the appropriate clinical usage of vonoprazan across various subsets of APDs, thereby optimizing the existing therapeutic options and improving the care and management of APD patients.

DepRescribing inapprOpriate Proton Pump InhibiTors (DROPIT): study protocol of a cluster-randomised controlled trial in Swiss primary care

OBJECTIVES

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely prescribed medications and commonly used for the treatment of gastric acid-related disorders. Nevertheless, PPIs are often overused leading to potential adverse effects and unnecessary healthcare costs. Deprescribing strategies have emerged to safely reduce or substitute inappropriate PPIs and optimise patient care in an evidence-based manner. This protocol describes a study to evaluate the effectiveness of a PPI deprescribing intervention in comparison to usual care in the Swiss primary care setting.

DESIGN

An open-label, cluster randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Swiss primary care settings.

PARTICIPANTS

Included participants will be adults with inappropriate PPI treatment and will be recruited by general practitioners (GPs). Participants treated by the same GP constitute a cluster. Clusters are randomised 1:1 to either the intervention group or the control group.

INTERVENTIONS

The intervention components consist of deprescribing tools including educational material, decision aids for both participants and GPs, and additional trainings for GPs only. Patients in the control group will receive usual care. Data will be collected at baseline, 3-, 6-, 9- and 12-month follow-up time through online surveys or a phone call for both GPs and participants.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The first co-primary endpoint is the effectiveness of the deprescribing intervention measured by the change of prescribed PPI dose. The second co-primary endpoint is safety, which is measured with the Reflux Disease Questionnaire assessing change in gastrointestinal symptoms. There are several secondary endpoints, such as the total number of prescribed medications, occurrences of changes in prescription patterns, PPI discontinuation and cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this study will provide evidence on the effectiveness and safety of a PPI deprescribing intervention for patients and GPs. Successful implementation of our PPI deprescribing strategy has the potential to improve patient outcomes and lower costs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT06129474.

The silent epidemic: Inappropriate use of proton pump inhibitors among hospitalized patients

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

There is an increasing trend to inappropriately prescribe proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in different clinical settings despite the reported adverse outcomes. This study aimed to assess (1) the prevalence of potentially inappropriate use of PPIs and its associated risk factors among hospitalized patients, at pre-admission and discharge and (2) the prevalence of valid indications of PPIs use without prescription.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective observational study was performed at a single center, examining the records of patients aged ≥18 years who were admitted to the Family Medicine inpatient service over a one-year period. The appropriateness of PPIs use was assessed against a set of pre-approved indications.

RESULTS

A total of 289 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 34.67 % were taking PPIs upon admission, increasing to 43.67 % at discharge (p < 0.001). Inappropriate PPI use was identified in 51.92 % at pre-admission and 57.25 % at discharge. Multivariate analysis identified significant factors contributing to inappropriate PPI use: polypharmacy at both admission and discharge (OR = 4.587, p = 0.031), and the presence of two or more comorbidities at discharge (OR = 5.421, p = 0.011; OR = 13.005, p = 0.037). Age ≤65 was associated with increased inappropriate use only at discharge (p < 0.003). Conversely, appropriate prescribing was noted in patients over 65 and those on antiplatelet therapy, aligning with clinical guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reveals a high prevalence of inappropriate PPI use among hospitalized patients, notably increasing from admission to discharge. Key contributors to inappropriate PPI usage included polypharmacy and high comorbidity scores at discharge, particularly in patients under 65. This emphasizes the need for targeted interventions to optimize PPI prescribing practices in clinical settings.

Pattern of Prescribing Proton Pump Inhibitors: Evaluating Appropriateness and Factors Contributing to Their Adverse Effect Reaction Risk

Background/Objectives: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are amongst the most commonly prescribed classes of medication. However, inappropriate PPI use can lead to several adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Limited data exist on factors contributing to the risk of ADRs associated with PPI prescribing patterns in the Eastern Region of Saudi Arabia. This retrospective, cross-sectional study aimed to assess the prevalence and the pattern of PPI use and to identify factors contributing to the risk of ADRs. Methods: Data were collected from electronic medical records of patients at Al-Qateef Central Hospital from January 2020 to December 2021. The inclusion criteria included patients aged ≥40 years attending an outpatient medical care clinic. PPI prescribing patterns were categorized based on their dosage intensity into low-dose, medium-dose (MD), and high-dose (HD) categories. Binary and multinominal logistic regression models were used to determine the relationship between PPI prescribing patterns and use, categorized by MD or HD, and patient characteristics, adjusted for significant covariates. Results are presented as adjusted odds ratio (OR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Results: The study included 41,084 patients. The prevalence of PPI prescribing was 31%. PPI users were more frequently found to be females than males (52% vs. 50%, p = 0.013); they were also likely to be prescribed more medications (7 vs. 6, p < 0.001), but less likely to have gastritis-related diseases (34% vs. 32%, p < 0.001) compared to non-users. PPI HD users were more likely male (56% vs. 43%, p < 0.001), older (53 vs. 52 years, p < 0.001), and prescribed more medications (11.8 vs. 2.8, p < 0.001) compared to MD users. PPI usage was associated with concurrent use of antiplatelet drugs (OR = 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.15). An increasing number of prescribed medications was associated with HD usage (OR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.12-1.14), but negatively associated with MD usage (OR = 0.7 95% CI 0.69-0.71). Female gender was negatively associated with HD usage (OR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.79-0.91). Conclusions: Our findings indicate that 31% of the included cohort were prescribed PPI. Inappropriate PPI prescribing related to the drug's omission is a concern as PPI non-users presented with valid indications such as gastritis. Male gender and increasing NPM were the common factors contributing to increased risk of PPI ADR. This study points to the importance of re-evaluating PPI use to ensure effective therapy with minimum risks of ADR.

Single center assessment of the role of Oakland score among patients admitted for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

The Oakland score was developed to predict safe discharge in patients who present to the emergency department with lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). In this study, we retrospectively evaluated if this score can be implemented to assess safe discharge (score ≤ 10) at WellStar Atlanta Medical Center (WAMC).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of 108 patients admitted at WAMC from January 1, 2020 to December 30, 2021 was performed. Patients with LGIB based on the ICD-10 codes were included. Oakland score was calculated using 7 variables (age, sex, previous LGIB, digital rectal exam, pulse, systolic blood pressure (SBP) and hemoglobin (Hgb)) for all patients at admission and discharge from the hospital. The total score ranges from 0 to 35 and a score of ≤ 10 is a cut-off that has been shown to predict safe discharge. Hgb and SBP are the main contributors to the score, where lower values correspond to a higher Oakland score. Descriptive and multivariate analysis was performed using SPSS 23 software.

RESULTS

A total of 108 patients met the inclusion criteria, 53 (49.1%) were female with racial distribution was as follows: 89 (82.4%) African Americans, 17 (15.7%) Caucasian, and 2 (1.9%) others. Colonoscopy was performed in 69.4% patients; and 61.1% patients required blood transfusion during hospitalization. Mean SBP records at admission and discharge were 129.0 (95% CI, 124.0-134.1) and 130.7 (95% CI,125.7-135.8), respectively. The majority (59.2%) of patients had baseline anemia and the mean Hgb values were 11.0 (95% CI, 10.5-11.5) g/dL at baseline prior to hospitalization, 8.8 (95% CI, 8.2-9.5) g/dL on arrival and 9.4 (95% CI, 9.0-9.7) g/dL at discharge from hospital. On admission, 100/108 (92.6%) of patients had an Oakland score of > 10 of which almost all patients (104/108 (96.2%)) continued to have persistent elevation of Oakland Score greater than 10 at discharge. Even though, the mean Oakland score improved from 21.7 (95% CI, 20.4-23.1) of the day of arrival to 20.3 (95% CI, 19.4-21.2) at discharge, only 4/108 (3.7%) of patients had an Oakland score of ≤ 10 at discharge. Despite this, only 9/108 (8.33%) required readmission for LGIB during a 1-year follow-up. We found that history of admission for previous LGIB was associated with readmission with adjusted odds ratio 4.42 (95% CI, 1.010-19.348, p = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, nearly all patients who had Oakland score of > 10 at admission continued to have a score above 10 at discharge. If the Oakland Score was used as the sole criteria for discharge most patients would not have met discharge criteria. Interestingly, most of these patients did not require readmission despite an elevated Oakland score at time of discharge, indicating the Oakland score did not really predict safe discharge. A potential confounder was the Oakland score did not consider baseline anemia during calculation. A prospective study to evaluate a modified Oakland score that considers baseline anemia could add value in this patient population.

Prevalence and factors associated with inappropriate continuation of stress ulcer prophylaxis at discharge

Stress ulcer prophylaxis is started in the critical care unit to decrease the risk of upper gastrointestinal ulcers in critically ill persons and to decrease mortality caused by stress ulcer complications. Unfortunately, the drugs are often continued after recovery through discharge, paving the way for unnecessary polypharmacy.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study including patients admitted to the adult critical care unit and started on the stress ulcer prophylaxis with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or histamine receptor 2 blocker (H2 blocker) with an aim to determine the prevalence of inappropriate continuation at discharge and associated factors.

RESULT

3200 people were initiated on stress ulcer prophylaxis, and the medication was continued in 1666 patients upon discharge. Indication for long-term use was not found in 744 of 1666, with a 44% prevalence of inappropriate continuation. A statistically significant association was found with the following risk factors: discharge disposition (home vs other medical facilities, p=0.002), overall length of stay (more than 10 days vs less than or equal to 10 days, p<0.0001), mechanical ventilator use (p<0.001), number of days on a mechanical ventilator (more than 2 days vs less than or equal to 2 days, p<0.001) and class of stress ulcer prophylaxis drug used (H2 blocker vs PPI, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of inappropriate continuation was found to be higher than prior studies. Given the risk of unnecessary medication intake and the associated healthcare cost, a web-based quality improvement initiative is being considered.

Proton pump inhibitors use is associated with a higher prevalence of kidney stones: NHANES 2007-2018

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used throughout the world as an effective gastrointestinal drug. Nevertheless, according to the existing literature, PPIs can reduce the excretion of magnesium, calcium and other components in urine, which may promote the formation of kidney stones. We used the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) database to further investigate the association between the use of PPIs and the prevalence of kidney stones.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional analysis using data from 2007 to 2018 NHANES. PPIs use information of 29,910 participants was obtained by using prescription medications in the preceding month, and kidney stones were presented by a standard questionnaire. Multiple regression analysis and stratified analysis were used to estimate the association between PPIs use and kidney stones after an adjustment for potential confounders.

RESULTS

The multiple logistic regression indicated that the PPIs exposure group (P1) had a significantly higher risk of nephrolithiasis than the PPIs non-exposure group (P0) in Model 3 (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.10-1.39, P < 0.001). The stratified analyses indicated there were significant statistical differences between PPIs use and kidney stones among females (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.15-1.62, P < 0.001), non-Hispanic whites (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.09-1.48, P = 0.002), individuals with an education level than 11th grade (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.13-1.76, P = 0.002) and individuals with an annual family income of $0 to $19,999 (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.06-1.65, P = 0.014) and $20,000 to $44,999 (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.02-1.54, P = 0.033) in Model 3.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study revealed that PPIs use is associated with a higher prevalence of kidney stones for the US population, primarily among women, non-Hispanic whites, individuals with low education levels and individuals with low household income levels. Further studies are required to confirm our findings.

Are Proton Pump Inhibitors Contributing in Emerging New Hypertensive Population?

Balancing the therapeutic advantages of a medicine with its possible risks and side effects is an important part of medical practice and drug regulation. When a drug is designed to treat a particular disease or medical condition ends up causing additional risks or side effects that lead to the development of other serious health problems, it can have detrimental consequences for patients. This article explores the correlation between persistent proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and hypertension, a common cardiovascular ailment. While PPIs are beneficial in treating various gastrointestinal problems, their availability without a prescription has resulted in self-medication and long-term use without medical monitoring. Recent findings have revealed a link between long-term PPI usage and increased cardiovascular risks, particularly hypertension. This study investigates the intricate mechanisms underlying PPI's effects, focusing on potential pathways contributing to hypertension, such as endothelial dysfunction, disruption of nitric oxide bioavailability, vitamin B deficiency, hypocalcemia, and hypomagnesemia. The discussion explains how long-term PPI use can disrupt normal endothelial function, vascular control, and mineral balance, eventually leading to hypertension. The article emphasizes the significance of using PPIs with caution and ongoing research to better understand the implications of these medications on cardiovascular health.

Inappropriate proton-pump inhibitor prescribing in primary care - an observational study with quality circles

INTRODUCTION

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) should be deprescribed when an indication is lacking or the dose is too high. Academic and media reports have tried to raise awareness and thereby reduce the inappropriate prescribing of PPIs. However, pharmacoepidemiologic studies have shown an unchanged frequency of such inappropriate prescribing over time. Little is known about whether or how general practitioners (GPs) adapt their prescribing practices once their awareness of inappropriate PPI prescribing has been raised.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the prevalence of potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing (too high dose or no indication) in a consecutive sample of patients in Swiss primary care settings. Our goal was then to evaluate how GPs managed the patients with potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing over 12 months after flagging these patients.

METHODS

In this observational study, 11 GPs from the canton of Bern in Switzerland used their medical records to identify 20 patients who had been prescribed a PPI for ≥8 weeks and flagged potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing in their records. After 12 months, we asked the same GPs whether the PPI prescriptions of those patients had changed and, if so, how.

RESULTS

Of 1,376 patients consecutively screened, 206 (15%) had been prescribed a PPI for ≥8 weeks. Of these 206 patients, 85 (41%) had a potentially inappropriate PPI prescription. Of these 85 patients, 55 (65%) had no indication for PPI, and 30 (35%) had a too-high dose. After one year, only 29 (35%) of the 84 flagged potentially inappropriate PPIs were stopped or reduced. The most frequently mentioned reasons that deprescribing was not possible were a lack of discussion with the patient (no contact or no time), the presence of symptoms requiring the PPI, or the unwillingness of the patient to deprescribe.

CONCLUSION

In the Swiss primary care setting, the rate of potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing is high. Having GPs flag potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing did not result in PPI deprescribing in most patients over 12 months. Our findings suggest that more personalised and targeted interventions are necessary to successfully implement the deprescribing of potentially inappropriate PPIs. We see the need to co-design interventions with patients and providers and test behavioural change techniques to enable the deprescribing of inappropriate PPIs.

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.

The effect of a patient informative leaflet on chronic use of proton pump inhibitors in a primary care center: a randomized control trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic non-medically indicated PPIs are highly prescribed worldwide. The long-term side effects of PPI must be wisely considered during an extended prescription duration. Our study purpose is to assess the impact of providing patients and physicians with educational guides on the rates of reducing or eliminating PPIs.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A controlled study targeting adult patients with chronic PPI use was conducted in a family medicine center in Beirut. Block randomization was employed. Patients (n = 140) were equally divided into an intervention group consisting of a patient-oriented informative and motivational leaflet and a control group having the same follow-up without having the leaflet. All participants filled a questionnaire. All participants received a short phone call in 2 and 6 months. An e-mail clarifying the objective of this study was sent to all physicians and supplemented with a PPI deprescribing algorithm.

RESULTS

At the 6-month follow-up, the rate of participants who talked to treating physicians about their PPI therapy was higher in the intervention group (p-value<0.0001), and the rate of participants who stepped down or off PPI was higher in the intervention group (p-value<0.0001). In participants who stepped down or off PPI, the reported breakthrough symptoms decreased over time (moderate: 24.2%, mild: 35.5%, and nil: 40.3% at 2-month follow-up; and moderate: 0%, mild: 55.4% and nil: 44.6% at 6-month follow-up; p-value<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

A low-intensity, low-cost, and easily replicable intervention encouraged a significant number of long-term users of PPIs to reduce or stop these medications without causing significant breakthrough symptoms.

The Effectiveness of Interventions to Evaluate and Reduce Healthcare Costs of Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions among the Older Adults: A Systematic Review

Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is associated with an increased risk of adverse drug reactions, recognized as a determinant of adherence and increased healthcare costs. The study's aim was to explore and compare the results of interventions to reduce PIP and its impact on avoidable healthcare costs. A systematic literature review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement guidelines. PubMed and Embase were queried until February 2021. Inclusion criteria followed the PICO model: older patients receiving PIP; Interventions aimed at health professionals, structures, and patients; no/any intervention as a comparator; postintervention costs variations as outcomes. The search strategy produced 274 potentially relevant publications, of which 18 articles met inclusion criteria. Two subgroups were analyzed according to the study design: observational studies assessing PIP frequency and related-avoidable costs (n = 10) and trials, including specific intervention and related outcomes in terms of postintervention effectiveness and avoided costs (n = 8). PIP prevalence ranged from 21 to 79%. Few educational interventions carried out to reduce PIP prevalence and avoidable costs resulted in a slowly improving prescribing practice but not cost effective. Implementing cost-effective strategies for reducing PIP and clinical and economic implications is fundamental to reducing health systems' PIP burden.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on De-Prescribing of Proton Pump Inhibitors: Expert Review

DESCRIPTION

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most commonly used medications in the world. Developed for the treatment and prevention of acid-mediated upper gastrointestinal conditions, these agents are being used increasingly for indications where their benefits are less certain. PPI overprescription imposes an economic cost and contributes to polypharmacy. In addition, PPI use has been increasingly linked to a number of adverse events (PPI-associated adverse events [PAAEs]). Therefore, de-prescribing of PPIs is an important strategy to lower pill burden while reducing real costs and theoretical risks. The purpose of this clinical update was to provide Best Practice Advice (BPA) statements about how to approach PPI de-prescribing in ambulatory patients.

METHODS

Our guiding principle was that, although PPIs are generally safe, patients should not use any medication when there is not a reasonable expectation of benefit based on scientific evidence or prior treatment response. Prescribers are responsible for determining whether PPI use is absolutely or conditionally indicated and, when uncertainty exists, to incorporate patient perspectives into PPI decision making. We collaboratively outlined a high-level "process map" of the conceptual approach to de-prescribing PPIs in a clinical setting. We identified the following 3 key domains that required BPA guidance: documentation of PPI indication; identifying suitable candidates for consideration of de-prescribing; and optimizing successful de-prescribing. Co-authors drafted 1 or more potential BPAs, supported by literature review, for each domain. All co-authors reviewed, edited, and selected or rejected draft BPAs for inclusion in the final list submitted to the American Gastroenterological Association Governing Board. Because this was not a systematic review, we did not carry out a formal rating of the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: All patients taking a PPI should have a regular review of the ongoing indications for use and documentation of that indication. This review should be the responsibility of the patient's primary care provider. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: All patients without a definitive indication for chronic PPI should be considered for trial of de-prescribing. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Most patients with an indication for chronic PPI use who take twice-daily dosing should be considered for step down to once-daily PPI. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Patients with complicated gastroesophageal reflux disease, such as those with a history of severe erosive esophagitis, esophageal ulcer, or peptic stricture, should generally not be considered for PPI discontinuation. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Patients with known Barrett's esophagus, eosinophilic esophagitis, or idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis should generally not be considered for a trial of de-prescribing. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: PPI users should be assessed for upper gastrointestinal bleeding risk using an evidence-based strategy before de-prescribing. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Patients at high risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding should not be considered for PPI de-prescribing. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Patients who discontinue long-term PPI therapy should be advised that they may develop transient upper gastrointestinal symptoms due to rebound acid hypersecretion. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: When de-prescribing PPIs, either dose tapering or abrupt discontinuation can be considered. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: The decision to discontinue PPIs should be based solely on the lack of an indication for PPI use, and not because of concern for PAAEs. The presence of a PAAE or a history of a PAAE in a current PPI user is not an independent indication for PPI withdrawal. Similarly, the presence of underlying risk factors for the development of an adverse event associated with PPI use should also not be an independent indication for PPI withdrawal.

[Proton-pump inhibitors treatment. Does your patient really need it?]

INTRODUCTION

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) are frequently prescribed for wide gastrointestinal disorders. The indications are well established, although a high rate of misuse has been reported.

METHODS

Observation cross-sectional study conducted a tertiary hospital. Adult patients who attended the emergency department were eligible. The appropriate indication was evaluated. Also, the prescription period, dosage and the prescribing clinician were reviewed.

RESULTS

300 patients were included. The indication was adequate in 142 patients (47.3%). The main indication was the primary prophylaxis for NSAIDs/ASA-induced enteropathy (n=95 patients, 31.7%). Polypharmacy was the main misuse indication (n=82 patients, 27.3%). The median prescription duration was 31 months (IQR 9-72), ranging from one month to 360 months. The duration was lower in those with correct indication (42.3 vs 59.6 months, P=.02). The primary care physician was the main responsible for prescription (n=165 patients, 55%), followed by gastroenterologist (n=38 patients, 12.7%) without significant differences in appropriateness by speciality.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies like this raise awareness about the PPI overuse and misuse. Deprescribing should be considered as essential to reduce iatrogenic risk and redundant health expenditure.

Inappropriateness of Proton Pump Inhibitors After Hospital Discharge Is Associated with Thirty-Day Hospital Readmission

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Concerns have been raised about the adverse effects of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Rather than PPIs themselves causing harm, we hypothesized that PPIs prescribed without appropriate indications would be associated with adverse outcomes compared to appropriately indicated PPIs.

METHODS

Adult patients initiated on a new PPI during a hospitalization at our institution from 2014 to 2018 were analyzed. The primary outcome was all-cause 30-day readmission rate. The primary exposure was long-term appropriateness of PPI determined by the presence of prespecified diagnostic codes and discharge medications. Logistic regression modeling was used to estimate the odds of 30-day readmission in patients discharged on inappropriate compared to appropriate new PPIs.

RESULTS

Of 84,236 patients admitted to our institution, 7745 (9.2%) were discharged on a new PPI, of which 5136 (66.3%) lacked an appropriately documented indication. Inappropriate PPIs were associated with 30-day hospital readmission after adjusting for other factors (adjusted odds ratio 1.30, 95% confidence interval 1.10-1.53). The excess risk associated with lack of appropriate documentation for PPIs in these patients was 44 readmissions per 1000 hospitalizations (95% confidence interval 21-67).

CONCLUSIONS

Discharge on inappropriate PPIs was associated with 30-day hospital readmission compared to appropriate PPIs. The harm associated with inappropriate PPIs is not likely due to direct effects of PPIs because all patients in the study received PPIs. Rather, patients who receive inappropriate PPIs may have additional patient-specific factors that place them at increased risk for hospital readmission.

An educational intervention to optimize use of proton pump inhibitors in a Greek university hospital

BACKGROUND

Misuse of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) is an alarming issue for patients and healthcare systems.

METHODS

We conducted a 3-phase interventional, prospective study in a Greek university hospital. During Phase I, we collected data from patients' records to evaluate the appropriate use of PPIs. During Phase II, educational seminars about the proper use of PPIs were offered to the medical staff. In Phase III we collected data from the records of patients admitted to the hospital department with the highest rate of inappropriate PPI administration during Phase I, to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention. Inappropriate use was defined as either PPI administration without indication, or lack of use despite adequate indication. Appropriateness of PPI use was measured at admission, during hospitalization and at discharge.

RESULTS

The rate of inappropriate PPI use was higher (51.7% and 48.6%) during hospitalization than at admission (34.9% and 21.9%), but at discharge was similar to pre-hospitalization levels (26.9% and 23.6%), in Phases I and III, respectively. At discharge during Phase I, the inappropriate use of PPIs was significantly higher (odds ratio 3.79, 95% confidence interval 1.98-7.19) for internal medicine patients than for surgical patients. The educational intervention failed to reduce the inappropriate use of PPIs during hospitalization (51.7% vs. 48.6%, P=0.478) or at discharge (26.9% vs. 23.6%, P=0.391) in the internal medicine patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of inappropriate PPI use is almost double during hospitalization compared to the rates at admission and at discharge. Implementation of an educational intervention failed to reduce the inappropriate use of PPIs in internal medicine patients.

Prevalence and Risk Factors for Inappropriate Continuation of Proton Pump Inhibitors After Discharge From the Intensive Care Unit

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence and risk factors for inappropriate discharge on proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy started in the intensive care unit (ICU) for stress ulcer prophylaxis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of adults initiated on treatment with a PPI in any of 9 affiliated ICUs from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2018. Patients were excluded if they had an appropriate long-term PPI indication. Logistic regression modeling was used to identify characteristics associated with discharge on treatment with an inappropriate PPI.

RESULTS

Of 24,751 patients admitted to an ICU, 4127 were initiated on treatment with a new PPI, with 2467 (60%) lacking a long-term PPI indication. Of these 2467, a total of 1122 (45%) were continued on PPI therapy after transfer to the floor and 668 (27%) were discharged on PPI therapy. On multivariable analysis, risk factors for inappropriate discharge on PPI therapy included having an upper endoscopy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.70; 95% CI, 1.08-2.66), admission to the surgical compared with medical ICU (aOR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.32-3.10), and discharge to a nursing home or rehabilitation facility (aOR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.04-1.96; and aOR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.62-3.24, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Among patients started on treatment with a PPI in the ICU without an indication for outpatient PPI use, 27% (668 of 2467) were nonetheless discharged on PPI therapy. Medically complex and surgical ICU patients are at increased risk for receiving PPIs without appropriate documented indications, and careful review of medication lists at discharge should occur in these high-risk groups.

Patients, Prescribers, and Institutional Factors Associated with Inappropriate Use of Acid Suppressive Therapy in Medical Wards: An Experience of a Single-Center in Saudi Arabia

PURPOSE

To identify factors associated with inappropriate acid-suppressive therapy (AST) use in hospitalized medical ward patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a combined retrospective cohort study reviewing the electronic medical records of medical ward in a secondary university hospital between January 2018 and July 2019, in addition to prescriber surveys about AST knowledge. We included adult patients (≥18 years old) admitted to the medical ward who received at least one dose of AST during their hospitalization. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics and logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 335 patients were included. Most of the patients were female (66.6%), with a mean age of 42.37 ± 17.72 years; 76% (n=256) of the study subjects were prescribed AST for an inappropriate indication. Patients who were not receiving any home medications associated with high bleeding risk had higher odds of being prescribed AST inappropriately (OR, 4.06; 95% CI, 1.09-13.8). A total of 27 physicians completed the prescriber survey, and the average prescriber's knowledge score was 46.8 ± 15.6%. This score did not differ by the prescriber's position.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated the overuse of AST in the medical ward. Therefore, improving providers' awareness about AST and implementing an AST stewardship program in institutions is necessary to limit this long-lasting issue.

Proton pump inhibitor and community pharmacies: Usage profile and factors associated with long-term use

Aim

To characterize the usage profile and the factors associated with the prolonged use of proton pump inhibitor drugs in a community pharmacy.

Methodology

This is a cross-sectional, prospective and observational study involving interviews with 410 patients who acquired PPI for their own use from community pharmacies. To characterize the factors associated with the prolonged use of PPI, a multivariate logistic regression model was used.

Results

Pantoprazole (42.7%) and omeprazole (31%) were the most acquired PPIs, prescribed mainly by gastroenterologists (49.5%). They are used in the morning, especially for gastrointestinal symptoms, however, they had been consumed for more than 5 years in 30% of cases. The factors associated with prolonged use are old age (OR 1.03 CI95% 1.01–1.05), body mass index (OR 1.07 CI95% 1.01–1.12), use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (OR 3.18 CI95% 1.20–8.43) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (OR 3.5 95% CI 1.39–8.88).

Conclusion

PPIs are adequate in terms of indication and form of use, however, prolonged use associated with old age, being overweight and use of anti-inflammatories and antidepressants is frequent.

Potentially inappropriate proton-pump inhibitor prescription in the general population: a claims-based retrospective time trend analysis

BACKGROUND

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) are among the most prescribed drugs worldwide, and a large body of evidence raises concerns about their inappropriate use. Previous estimates of inappropriate use varied due to different definitions and study populations.

AIMS

We aimed to measure the population-based incidence and time trends of PPI and potentially inappropriate PPI prescriptions (PIPPI) with a novel method, continuously assessing excessive cumulative doses based on clinical practice guidelines. We also assessed association of patient characteristics with PPI prescriptions and PIPPI.

METHODS

This was an observational study based on a large insurance claims database of persons aged >18 years with continuous claims records of ⩾12 months. The observation period was January 2012 to December 2017. We assessed the incidence and time trends of PPI prescriptions and PIPPI based on doses prescribed, defining ⩾11.5 g of pantoprazole dose equivalents during any consecutive 365 days (average daily dose >31 mg) as inappropriate.

RESULTS

Among 1,726,491 eligible persons, the annual incidence of PPI prescriptions increased from 19.7% (2012) to 23.0% (2017), (p = <0.001), and the incidence of PIPPI increased from 4.8% (2013) to 6.4% (2017), (p = <0.001). Age, male gender, drugs with bleeding risk and multimorbidity were independent determinants of PIPPI (p = <0.001 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence that one of the most prescribed drug groups is commonly prescribed inappropriately in the general population and that this trend is increasing. Multimorbidity and drugs with bleeding risks were strong determinants of PIPPI. Addressing PPI prescriptions exceeding guideline recommendations could reduce polypharmacy and improve patient safety.

Inappropriate Prescribing of Proton Pump Inhibitors in Outpatient Clinics

Proton pump inhibitors are the commonly prescribed drugs for acid-related disorders. However, many of those prescriptions are inappropriate in inpatient and outpatient settings according to the recommended guidelines. Many studies have been conducted in inpatient clinics, but data about the appropriateness of proton pump inhibitor prescribing in outpatient clinics are scarce. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine inappropriate proton pump inhibitor prescribing rates among patients admitted to a tertiary hospital family medicine outpatient clinic. A total of 259 patients (median age = 59 years; 72.6% women) were enrolled into the study and 35.9% of them had no proper indications to utilize proton pump inhibitors. Inappropriate proton pump inhibitor usage rate was significantly higher in patients older than 60 years compared with their younger counterparts (62.4% vs. 37.6%; p = .001). The most frequent reason to use a proton pump inhibitor with nonapproved indications was polypharmacy (41.9%). Despite endoscopic evaluation, 41.9% of the patients received a proton pump inhibitor without an approved indication. A significant proportion of nonindicated prescriptions were a consequence of continued prescribing without re-evaluating patients in outpatient clinics. Consideration of proton pump inhibitor indications according to the guidelines in every admission may prevent inappropriate prescriptions.

[Evidence-Based Indication for Proton Pump Inhibitors - a Group Practice Perspective]

Evidence-Based Indication for Proton Pump Inhibitors - a Group Practice Perspective Abstract. Little is known about the extent of non-evidence-based proton pump inhibitor (PPI) prescriptions in the general practice setting in Switzerland. A recommendation for long-term therapy was included in the "Top 5 list" of "smarter medicine" for the outpatient internal medicine in 2014. The observational study recorded the proportion of patients without evidence-based indication for PPI in a practice with six general practitioners retrospectively over three months. Of 2225 patients analysed, 11.1 % (n = 248) took a PPI. The percentage of patients without a clear evidence-based indication was 46.8 %. Almost every second patient did not have a clear evidence-based indication for PPI. The results could be an incentive for general practitioners to reconsider the indication when prescribing PPI, also in the sense of "smarter medicine".

Pharmacologic treatment of GERD: Where we are now, and where are we going?

The introduction of acid inhibition in clinical practice has revolutionized the management of acid-related diseases, leading to the virtual abolition of elective surgery for ulcer disease and relegating antireflux surgery to patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) not adequately managed by medical therapy. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the antisecretory drugs of choice for the treatment of reflux disease. However, these drugs still leave some unmet clinical needs in GERD. PPI-refractoriness is common, and persistent symptoms are observed in up to 40-55% of daily PPI users. Potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) clearly overcome many of the drawbacks and limitations of PPIs, achieving rapid, potent, and prolonged acid suppression, offering the opportunity to address many of the unmet needs. In recent years, it has been increasingly recognized that impaired mucosal integrity is involved in the pathogenesis of GERD. As a consequence, esophageal mucosal protection has emerged as a new, promising therapeutic avenue. When P-CABS are used as add-on medications to standard treatment, a growing body of evidence suggests a significant additional benefit, especially in the relief of symptoms not responding to PPI therapy. On the contrary, reflux inhibitors are considered a promise unfulfilled, and prokinetic agents should only be used on a case-by-case basis.

Proton pump inhibitor use is associated with hip fracture development: a nationwide population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Effect of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use on the risk of hip fracture is controversial. This study aimed to clarify the association between PPI use and hip fracture risk using a large cohort.

METHODS

This study recruited participants from the nationwide cohort (n = 1,025,340). After exclusion of participants who had hip fractures or were aged less than 40 years during the baseline period (2002 to 2004), 371,806 participants were followed to 2013. Participants prescribed PPIs for more than 90 days during baseline period were defined as users. Fracture cases were defined when participants were hospitalized with claims of a hip fracture.

RESULTS

During 4,159,343 person-years of follow-up, fractures developed more often in PPI users than in nonusers (relative risk [RR], 1.787; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.260 to 2.534; p = 0.002). The results persisted after adjusting for age, sex, and many drugs relevant to osteoporosis or influential in bone health. Furthermore, fracture risk associated with PPI use increased with duration of use (p trend < 0.001). The fully adjusted RRs of hip fracture development were 1.350 (95% CI, 1.203 to 1.515) for 1- to 90-day users, 1.487 (95% CI, 0.957 to 2.311) for 91- to 180-day users, and 1.771 (95% CI, 0.931 to 3.368) for > 180-day users. The positive association between PPI use and fracture was also confirmed in a subgroup with health screening data where further adjustment for body mass index, smoking status, alcohol consumption, and physical activity was available (adjusted RR, 2.025; 95% CI, 1.151 to 3.564, p = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

PPI use is associated with hip fracture development.

[Use and management of proton pump inhibitors: An observational study]

INTRODUCTION

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have improved the management and prevention of digestive diseases, leading to a heavy prescription of this therapy. In 2015, nearly one quarter of the French population had consumed a PPI and half of them were long-term users. The main objective of this study was to analyze, in patients hospitalized in several medical departments, the adequacy of long-term PPI prescriptions to recommendations.

METHOD

The Use and management of proton pump inhibitors: an observational study project (UTOPPIA) is a longitudinal observational study conducted at the University Hospital of Saint-Étienne in the departments of hepato-gastroenterology, infectious and tropical diseases, internal medicine, vascular medicine and nephrology. All patients with PPI treatment on their usual outpatient prescription were interviewed.

RESULTS

Over a 3-month period, 334 of hospitalized patients (30.7%) had received a long-term PPI prescription and 181 patients (54.2%) could be included in the study for a total of 274 indications. Ninety-nine patients (54.7%) had a long-term PPI prescription in accordance with the recommendations. The most frequent indication (70 prescriptions) was the prescription of an antiplatelet drug or anticoagulant for subjects at high risk of bleeding in 70 prescriptions. Fifty-three PPI treatments were amended during the hospital stay, including 9 discontinuations. The justification for the change was documented in the patients' chart in only 17% of cases. Individual interviews of patients revealed that 75.1% of them were in favour of discontinuing their PPI treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

About one-third of hospitalized patients in medical wards in France have long-term PPI treatment and half of these prescriptions do not comply with good practice recommendations. A majority of patients report being willing to try to stop PPI therapy.

Reducing the Inappropriate Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors in an Internal Medicine Residency Clinic

Introduction

Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are commonly prescribed in the primary care setting. While generally considered to be safe, there is growing evidence suggesting that PPI misuse is associated with a variety of significant adverse outcomes and unnecessary cost. The goal of this quality improvement project was to identify patients with non-guideline recommended PPI prescriptions in our internal medicine residency clinics and implement a process to de-prescribe or reduce the dose of PPIs across this patient population.

Methods

PPI prescription rates, dosage, and indication were extracted from the medical records of all 854 patients empaneled to the internal medicine residency clinics at a multicenter closed referral military hospital system. Appropriate PPI indication was consensus based upon published guidelines, and patients without an appropriate indication were targeted for intervention. These patients were directly contacted by their primary care physicians, via phone or during a clinic visit, to discuss the risks and benefits of ongoing PPI use as well as alternative therapies or tapering regimens at the physician’s discretion. For moderate to high dose PPI, the dose was decreased by 50% every week until the lowest tolerated dose was achieved or until discontinuation. For low dose PPI, discontinuation was recommended as the initial intervention. Six months following the intervention, the empanelment was reevaluated for ongoing PPI usage, tapered dosage, or discontinuation.

Results

Of a total of 854 patient records reviewed at the initiation of the project, 322 patients were noted to be prescribed PPIs. Of this subset, 66% (217/322) did not meet a guideline recommended indication for their use. At the completion of the six-month intervention period, 44% (96/217) of patients were successfully weaned to a reduced dose or were no longer using a PPI.

Conclusions

PPIs are widely used and generally considered to be a well-tolerated therapy for acid-secretion disorders. PPI overprescription and the associated adverse effects and economic burden are increasingly recognized. We show that a simple, focused, resident-driven quality improvement intervention can be effective in de-prescribing efforts to reduce inappropriate PPI use in the outpatient primary care setting.

Deprescribing Proton Pump Inhibitors in an Academic, Primary Care Clinic: Quality Improvement Project

GOAL

The goal of this study was to reduce the percentage of inappropriately prescribed proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in patients aged 50 and older from 80% (baseline) to 60% within 12 months in an academic, internal medicine clinic.

BACKGROUND

The use of PPIs has increased drastically worldwide. Internal medicine clinic patients had inappropriate use of PPIs for an average of 4 to 5 years.

STUDY

A multidisciplinary quality improvement team used the Plan-Do-Study-Act Model of health care improvement and performed a root cause analysis to identify barriers to inappropriate use of PPIs. The outcome measure was the percentage of patients inappropriately prescribed PPI. Process measures were completion rates of PPI risk assessment and esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Interventions included the creation of customized electronic health record templates and education to providers and patients. Analysis was performed using monthly statistical process control charts.

RESULTS

The average rate of PPI discontinuation was 51.1% (n=92/180), which corresponds to 30.0% inappropriate PPI usage within 12 months. The mean PPI discontinuation rate in the 1-year prestudy, study and 6 months poststudy period was 2.0%, 32.0%, and 49.7%, respectively. The mean esophagogastroduodenoscopy completion rate was 49.8% from the baseline of <30%.

CONCLUSIONS

We achieved a statistically significant and sustainable reduction of inappropriate PPI use to 30% from the baseline rates of 80% and surpassed our goal within 12 months. This quality improvement was unique as no pharmacy personnel was utilized in this process. The multifaceted strategies in a safety-net internal medicine clinic resulted in successful deprescribing of PPI and can be replicated in other setting.

The inappropriate use of proton pump inhibitors during admission and after discharge: a prospective cross-sectional study

Background Proton pump inhibitors are often inappropriately prescribed during hospital admission and after discharge. The inappropriate prescription may be associated with increased and unnecessary healthcare costs. Objective To determine the prevalence of inappropriate prescription of proton pump inhibitors during hospital admission and after discharge at Thailand's largest national tertiary referral center. Setting Medicine wards at Siriraj Hospital (Bangkok, Thailand) during September 2016 to September 2017. Method This prospective observational cross-sectional study in hospitalized patients who were prescribed, or who were already taking proton pump inhibitors. Medical records were reviewed to determine whether proton pump inhibitors were prescribed at discharge and at the 1-month follow-up. Main outcome measure Prevalence of inappropriate prescription of proton pump inhibitors during hospital admission and after discharge, indication of inappropriate prescription. Results Two hundred and sixty-five patients (mean age: 65.8 ± 18.3 years, 50.9% men) were included. Approximately half of patients had proton pump inhibitor treatment initiated in the hospital, and the other 50.6% started treatment earlier. Among all patients, 50.6% were inappropriately prescribed proton pump inhibitors, in which 79.1% resulted from invalid indications. Fifty-two percent and 47.3% of patients who were prescribed proton pump inhibitors at discharge and at the 1-month follow-up had no indications for them. Gastrointestinal ulcer prophylaxis in low-risk patients was the most commonly observed incorrect indication. Aspirin (p = 0.030) and corticosteroids (p = 0.038) were both found to be significantly associated with the inappropriate prescription of proton pump inhibitors. The estimated cost of inappropriate use among inpatients and outpatients was $118,659 and $214,663 per year, respectively. Conclusion Proton pump inhibitors are excessively and inappropriately prescribed during hospital admission and after discharge in Thailand. The cost of this overprescribing is excessive and needs to be controlled.

Proton pump inhibitors for upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) remains a public health burden with a persistent high mortality despite advances in modern day management. Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) as medical therapy is an attractive adjuvant to endoscopic treatment in UGIB but the method and dose of PPI therapy remains controversial. This chapter aims to describe the current evidence addressing acute PPI use in the management of UGIB. It will explore the evidence behind the timing, the dosage and the mode of administration of PPI during initial UGIB management, prior to and immediately following endoscopy, as well as in the short-term following discharge.

Non-invasive method for the assessment of gastric acid secretion

Methods for the measure of gastric acid secretion include invasive and non-invasive tests. The gold-standard to measure the acid output is the collection of gastric after in basal condition (Basal Acid Output, B.A.O.) and after an i.m. injection of pentagastrin (Maximal Acid Output, M.A.O.). However, direct measurement of gastric acid production is out of order in clinical practice, but many GI symptoms are claimed to be related with acid disorders and empirically cured. Hypochlorhydria is associated with precancerous conditions such as chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG). Acid measurement with non-invasive methods (pepsinogens) is supported by international guidelines.

Proton pump inhibitors: use and misuse in the clinical setting

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) into clinical practice has greatly improved our therapeutic approach to acid-related diseases for their efficacy and safety. Areas Covered: The following evidence-based indications for PPI use are acknowledged by many scientific societies: treatment of the various forms and complications of gastroesophageal reflux disease, eradication of H. pylori infection in combination with two or more antibiotics, short- and long-term therapy of H. pylori-negative peptic ulcers, healing, and prevention of NSAID/COXIB-associated gastric ulcers, co-therapy with endoscopic procedures to control upper digestive bleeding and medical treatment of Zollinger Ellison syndrome. Expert Commentary: Despite the above well-defined indications, however, the use of PPIs continues to grow every year in both western and eastern countries and the endless expansion of the PPI market has created important problems for many regulatory authorities for two relevant features: the progressive increase of the costs of therapy and the greater potential harms for the patients. The major reasons for the misuse of PPIs are the prevention of gastro-duodenal ulcers in patients without risk factors and the stress ulcer prophylaxis in non-intensive care units, steroid therapy alone, anti-platelet or anti-coagulant treatment in patients without risk of gastric injury and the overtreatment of functional dyspepsia.

Appropriateness in prescribing PPIs: A position paper of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE) - Study section "Digestive Diseases in Primary Care"

The introduction of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) into clinical practice about thirty years ago has greatly improved our therapeutic approach to acid-related diseases for their well-recognized efficacy and safety. Despite the well-defined indications, however, the use of PPIs continues to grow every year in both western and eastern countries and this phenomenon poses serious queries that include the onset of potential adverse effects and the increase in health care costs. The major reason explaining this worrying market expansion is the inappropriate use of PPIs. In order to re-establish a correct use of these effective drugs in daily clinical practice, the Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE), nominated a panel of experts who reviewed the available clinical literature and produced a series of updated position statements on the use of PPIs in clinical practice.

Discontinuing Long-Term PPI Therapy: Why, With Whom, and How?

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most widely used class of drugs prescribed over the long term in all of clinical medicine with 8-10% of ambulatory adults have been prescribed a PPI in the past 30 days. However, numerous studies have raised doubts about the long term safety of PPI use. The purpose of this review is threefold: (i) To provide an overview of the current evidence demonstrating associations between PPI use and adverse health outcomes and the likelihood of the associations being causal (Why?); (ii) To be able to identify long-term PPI users in whom the intensity of PPI therapy could be reduced or in whom PPIs could be eliminated outright (Who?); and (iii) To provide strategies on how to reduce or stop chronic PPI therapy while maintaining symptom control and reducing the risk for symptom or upper GI disease recurrence (How?).

Proton-pump inhibitors among adults: a nationwide drug-utilization study

BACKGROUND

The use of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) has grown worldwide, and there are concerns about increased unsubstantiated long-term use. The aim of the study was to describe the real-world use of PPIs over the past decade in an entire national population.

METHODS

This was a nationwide population-based drug-utilization study. Patterns of outpatient PPI use among adults in Iceland between 2003 and 2015 were investigated, including annual incidence and prevalence, duration of use, and dose of tablet used (lower versus higher), as well as the proportion of PPI use attributable to gastroprotection.

RESULTS

We observed 1,372,790 prescription fills over the entire study period, of which 95% were for higher-dose PPIs. Annual incidence remained stable across time (3.3-4.1 per 100 persons per year), while the annual prevalence increased from 8.5 per 100 persons to 15.5 per 100 persons. Prevalence increased with patient age and was higher among women than men. Duration of treatment increased with patients' age (36% of users over 80 years remained on treatment after 1 year compared with 13% of users aged 19-39 years), and was longer among those initiating on a higher dose compared with a lower dose. The proportion of PPI users concurrently using nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs decreased over the study period, while the proportion concurrently using acetylsalicylic acid, oral anticoagulants, or platelet inhibitors increased.

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide study, a considerable increase in overall outpatient use of PPIs over a 13-year period was observed, particularly among older adults. Patients were increasingly treated for longer durations than recommended by clinical guidelines and mainly with higher doses.

Proton pump inhibitors therapy and risk of Clostridium difficile infection: Systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) therapy and the risk of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). METHODS We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE/PubMed and seven other databases through January 1990 to March 2017 for published studies that evaluated the association between PPIs and CDI. Adult case-control and cohort studies providing information on the association between PPI therapy and the development of CDI were included. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the random effect. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2 test and Cochran's Q statistic. Potential publication bias was evaluated via funnel plot, and quality of studies by the Newcastle-Otawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS).

RESULTS

Fifty-six studies (40 case-control and 16 cohort) involving 356683 patients met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Both the overall pooled estimates and subgroup analyses showed increased risk for CDI despite substantial statistical heterogeneity among studies. Meta-analysis of all studies combined showed a significant association between PPI users and the risk of CDI (pooled OR = 1.99, CI: 1.73-2.30, P < 0.001) as compared with non-users. The association remained significant in subgroup analyses: by design-case-control (OR = 2.00, CI: 1.68-2.38, P < 0.0001), and cohort (OR = 1.98, CI: 1.51-2.59, P < 0.0001); adjusted (OR = 1.95, CI: 1.67-2.27, P < 0.0001) and unadjusted (OR = 2.02, CI: 1.41-2.91, P < 0.0001); unicenter (OR = 2.18, CI: 1.72-2.75, P < 0.0001) and multicenter (OR = 1.82, CI: 1.51-2.19, P < 0.0001); age ≥ 65 years (OR = 1.93, CI: 1.40-2.68, P < 0.0001) and < 65 years (OR = 2.06, CI: 1.11-3.81, P < 0.01). No significant differences were found in subgroup analyses (test for heterogeneity): P = 0.93 for case-control vs cohort, P = 0.85 for adjusted vs unadjusted, P = 0.24 for unicenter vs multicenter, P = 0.86 for age ≥ 65 years and < 65 years. There was significant heterogeneity across studies (I2 = 85.4%, P < 0.001) as well as evidence of publication bias (funnel plot asymmetry test, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis provides further evidence that PPI use is associated with an increased risk for development of CDI. Further high-quality, prospective studies are needed to assess whether this association is causal.

Use of proton pump inhibitors in general practice

AIM

To evaluate the characteristics of the prescription of the proton pump inhibitor drugs (PPI) and the adherence to the indications of the guidelines regulating the reimbursement limitations set forth by the Italian Drug Agency.

METHODS

Thirty general practitioners (GP) participated in the study, providing data on more than 40000 patients in total. The population was divided into non occasional users of PPI drugs (PPI users) and non-users (PPI non-users) based on evidence of a prescription of at least 3 packs of PPIs in the last 90 d before analysis. The data provided allowed an assessment of compliance with the requirements of eligibility for PPI reimbursement according to the Italian Drug Agency rules, in order to obtain subpopulations which complied or not with the rules.

RESULTS

Six thousand three hundred and twenty-two patients were found to be PPI users, accounting for 14.9% of the patient population. PPI users were more frequently female, older and more frequently diagnosed with gastroesophageal reflux disease, gastric or duodenal ulcers, arthropathy, heart disease and cancer than the rest of the population. PPI users had more frequently received prescriptions for non-steroidal ant-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS), acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), oral anticoagulant therapy (OAT) and systemic steroids. PPI reimbursement resulted applicable to 69.3% of the PPI users, but a potential for reimbursement of PPI prescriptions was identified in the non PPI users for the treatment of peptic or reflux disease (8.5%) and for the protection of gastric damage caused by NSAIDS (6.1%). Patients who are potentially eligible for reimbursement are older, diagnosed with arthropathy and heart disease more frequently and most commonly receive NSAID and ASA prescriptions compared with PPI users who do not satisfy eligibility requirements. Patients in whom it was not possible to identify conditions related to prescription suitability were more frequently associated with use of OAT.

CONCLUSION

A substantial number of patients who apparently do not meet prescription suitability conditions can be identified, but among non PPI users on the contrary, it is possible to identify an equal number of patients for whom prescription would be suitable. Poor suitability can be identified in the population receiving OAT. Thus, there is scope for decreasing inappropriate use of PPI drugs by adhering to certain criteria and by involving all interested parties.

The appropriate use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs): Need for a reappraisal

The advent of powerful acid-suppressive drugs, such as proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), has revolutionized the management of acid-related diseases and has minimized the role of surgery. The major and universally recognized indications for their use are represented by treatment of gastro-esophageal reflux disease, eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection in combination with antibiotics, therapy of H. pylori-negative peptic ulcers, healing and prophylaxis of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-associated gastric ulcers and control of several acid hypersecretory conditions. However, in the last decade, we have witnessed an almost continuous growth of their use and this phenomenon cannot be only explained by the simple substitution of the previous H2-receptor antagonists, but also by an inappropriate prescription of these drugs. This endless increase of PPI utilization has created an important problem for many regulatory authorities in terms of increased costs and greater potential risk of adverse events. The main reasons for this overuse of PPIs are the prevention of gastro-duodenal ulcers in low-risk patients or the stress ulcer prophylaxis in non-intensive care units, steroid therapy alone, anticoagulant treatment without risk factors for gastro-duodenal injury, the overtreatment of functional dyspepsia and a wrong diagnosis of acid-related disorder. The cost for this inappropriate use of PPIs has become alarming and requires to be controlled. We believe that gastroenterologists together with the scientific societies and the regulatory authorities should plan educational initiatives to guide both primary care physicians and specialists to the correct use of PPIs in their daily clinical practice, according to the worldwide published guidelines.

Effective and safe proton pump inhibitor therapy in acid-related diseases - A position paper addressing benefits and potential harms of acid suppression

BACKGROUND

The introduction of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) into clinical practice has revolutionized the management of acid-related diseases. Studies in primary care and emergency settings suggest that PPIs are frequently prescribed for inappropriate indications or for indications where their use offers little benefit. Inappropriate PPI use is a matter of great concern, especially in the elderly, who are often affected by multiple comorbidities and are taking multiple medications, and are thus at an increased risk of long-term PPI-related adverse outcomes as well as drug-to-drug interactions. Herein, we aim to review the current literature on PPI use and develop a position paper addressing the benefits and potential harms of acid suppression with the purpose of providing evidence-based guidelines on the appropriate use of these medications.

METHODS

The topics, identified by a Scientific Committee, were assigned to experts selected by three Italian Scientific Societies, who independently performed a systematic search of the relevant literature using Medline/PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane databases. Search outputs were distilled, paying more attention to systematic reviews and meta-analyses (where available) representing the best evidence. The draft prepared on each topic was circulated amongst all the members of the Scientific Committee. Each expert then provided her/his input to the writing, suggesting changes and the inclusion of new material and/or additional relevant references. The global recommendations were then thoroughly discussed in a specific meeting, refined with regard to both content and wording, and approved to obtain a summary of current evidence.

RESULTS

Twenty-five years after their introduction into clinical practice, PPIs remain the mainstay of the treatment of acid-related diseases, where their use in gastroesophageal reflux disease, eosinophilic esophagitis, Helicobacter pylori infection, peptic ulcer disease and bleeding as well as, and Zollinger-Ellison syndrome is appropriate. Prevention of gastroduodenal mucosal lesions (and symptoms) in patients taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or antiplatelet therapies and carrying gastrointestinal risk factors also represents an appropriate indication. On the contrary, steroid use does not need any gastroprotection, unless combined with NSAID therapy. In dyspeptic patients with persisting symptoms, despite successful H. pylori eradication, short-term PPI treatment could be attempted. Finally, addition of PPIs to pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in patients with refractory steatorrhea may be worthwhile.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, PPIs are irreplaceable drugs in the management of acid-related diseases. However, PPI treatment, as any kind of drug therapy, is not without risk of adverse effects. The overall benefits of therapy and improvement in quality of life significantly outweigh potential harms in most patients, but those without clear clinical indication are only exposed to the risks of PPI prescription. Adhering with evidence-based guidelines represents the only rational approach to effective and safe PPI therapy. Please see related Commentary: doi: 10.1186/s12916-016-0724-1 .

Esomeprazole use is independently associated with significant reduction of BMD: 1-year prospective comparative safety study of four proton pump inhibitors

Because of the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), their the use is increasing dramatically. The risk of adverse effects of short-term PPI therapy is low, but there are important safety concerns for potential adverse effects of prolonged PPI therapy. Findings from studies assessing the association between PPI use and bone mineral density (BMD) and/or fracture risk are contradictory. The aim of this study was to prospectively assess potential association of PPI treatment with the 12-month change in BMD of the lumbar spine, femur neck, and total hip. The study was performed in 200 PPI users and 50 PPI nonusers. Lumbar spine (L1-L4), femur neck, and total hip BMD were measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry at the baseline and at 12 months. A total of 209 subjects completed the entire 12 months of the study and were included in the final analysis. A Wilcoxon signed-rank test showed that at 12 months PPI use was associated with statistically significant reductions in femur neck and total hip T scores (Z = -2.764, p = 0.005 and Z = -3.281, p = 0.001, respectively). A multiple linear regression analysis showed that only esomeprazole added significantly to the prediction of total lumbar spine and femur neck T scores (p = 0.048 and p = 0.037, respectively). Compared with the baseline, 12 months of PPI treatment resulted in lower femur neck and total hip BMD T scores. Among the four PPIs studied, esomeprazole was independently associated with significant reduction of BMD, whereas omeprazole had no effects on BMD. Considering the widespread use of PPIs, BMD screening should be considered in the case of prolonged PPI use.