Detection of potentially inappropriate prescribing in the very old: cross-sectional analysis of the data from the BELFRAIL observational cohort study

Improving usability of the STOPP/START version 3 criteria: development of a practice tool for clinicians, students and researchers

BACKGROUND

The STOPP/START criteria are aimed to be used by clinicians to perform medication review to optimize pharmacotherapy in older adults. The STOPP/START.version 3 (SS.v3) published in European Geriatric Medicine in 2023 updated and significantly extended the previous version. SS.v3 is more open to criticism for its poor usability in daily clinical practice. The present study aimed at contributing to SS.v3 by highlighting the new content of its criteria and by providing clinicians, students and researchers with a user-friendly presentation to facilitate medication review.

METHODS

The SS.v3 criteria were reviewed by seven geriatricians and clinical pharmacists with expertise in pharmacotherapy in older adults. The 190 SS.v3 criteria were carefully compared to the 115 SS.v2 criteria in order to identify the new ones and those with clinically significant modifications. A single-entry table was developed for the medications (STOPP.v3) and the medical conditions (START.v3).

RESULTS

Among the 133 STOPP.v3 criteria, we identified 54 new (41%) and 25 modified (19%) ones. The 57 START.v3 criteria include 24 new (42%) and 17 modified (30%) ones. The single-entry table is a comprehensive presentation of SSv3 in 3 pages. It is systematically organized and upfront presents the medication for the STOPP criteria and the condition for the START criteria, enhancing its usability.

CONCLUSION

This work highlights many new and modified SS.v3 criteria that clinicians, students and researchers should be aware of. The single-entry table for STOPP medications and START clinical conditions may facilitate medication review for older adults in daily clinical practice.

Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing to Older Patients Admitted to Units for Integrated Continuous Care: Application of STOPP/START Criteria

Background: Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescription omissions (PPOs) have been widely explored, but few studies focused on patients aged 75 years and over. This study was planned to explore the demographic and clinical characteristics of the older patients admitted to Units for Integrated Continuous Care, and to assess the prevalence and potential predictors of PIMs and PPOs. Methods: An observational, retrospective, and multicenter study was performed on 135 patients aged 75 years or older (i.e., 75-84 years and ≥85 years). PIMs and PPOs were investigated by applying the Screening Tool of Older People's Prescriptions (STOPP) and Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START) criteria. Results: The oldest-old patients (≥85 years) were less likely to come from a hospital, had fewer daily medications and a lower number of oral doses, but they presented a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, were more dependent on activities of daily living, and were less obese than those aged 75-84 years. Results showed a high prevalence of PIMs and PPOs in both age groups. The more common PIMs and PPOs were the same in both age groups. The oldest-old patients who suffered falls were more likely to have a prescription omission of vitamin D supplements. The PIM index was not significantly different between age groups but was higher in the oldest-old group. Conclusions: Patients with a higher number of prescriptions had a higher risk of PIMs. Regarding PPOs, male gender and fall risk were predictors in the youngest group, while the number of comorbidities was significantly associated with PPOs in the oldest group. This study supports the usefulness of the STOPP/START criteria to identify PIMs and PPOs in these patients, but more research is required to determine the potential adverse outcomes of PIMs and PPOs and their clinical and economic consequences.

General practitioners' views on inappropriate prescribing for older patients: a qualitative study through focus groups

BACKGROUND

Inappropriate prescribing (IP) is a common problem in the older population. Despite numerous attempts to tackle this issue, it remains a public health concern. In most European countries, general practitioners (GPs) are responsible for global primary care and are thus gatekeepers for the adequacy of medicines, specifically for older people. An in-depth analysis of the situation is necessary to understand why this phenomenon is still prevalent and to identify solutions that could help avoid IP in primary practice.

METHOD

A qualitative study based on five focus groups (FG) comprising nine to thirteen general practitioners was conducted in the French-speaking part of Belgium. Participants were recruited among the Local Medical Evaluation Groups (LMEG) and selected to guarantee heterogeneity in working organisations, years of professional experience, gender and age. All interviews were recorded with prior agreement and transcribed in verbatims. The transcripts were coded and analysed to highlight the primary themes, considering dominant and marginal discourses.

RESULTS

Fifty four GPs participated in the study, with an average experience of 30 years. IPs are perceived as a significant problem in the older population, leading to dangerous health situations. The issue is associated with polypharmacy and multimorbidity, and GPs stated to manage IP using their clinical experience. Most of the study participants faced difficulties managing IP, mostly due to the specificity and complexity of elderly care. Indeed, managing an older patient is challenging due to medical complexity, poor adherence to drug regimes, or low medical literacy. In addition, the medical environment of general practice is challenging, with multiple providers, lack of time, prescribing routine and the absence of effective communication with specialists or other care providers. Additionally, the tools and support available to help medication management in primary care are inadequate. Enhancing collaboration with pharmacists is perceived as a strong potential facilitator.

CONCLUSION

This article addresses the complex management of IP in the old age, from the point of view of GPs. Interesting clues were highlighted, like the need to clarify roles of healthcare providers, the better fit of tools to facilitate medication's review with particularities of GPs needs and the empowerment of pharmacist collaboration.

Statin therapy in multimorbid older patients with polypharmacy- a cross-sectional analysis of the Swiss OPERAM trial population

Background

Statin therapy in multimorbid older individuals with polypharmacy is controversial, particularly in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Thereby, physicians must weigh potential benefits against potential side effects, drug-drug interactions, and limited life expectancy.

Aim

To assess the prevalence and determinants of potentially inappropriate statin therapy in multimorbid older patients.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of patients aged ≥70 years with multimorbidity and polypharmacy in the Swiss study center of OPERAM, a cluster-randomized trial on pharmacotherapy optimization to reduce drug-related hospital admissions. We assessed potential underuse (no statin but formal indication) and potential overuse (statin but no formal indication, including predicted >60% one-year mortality based on the Walter Score) based on current guidelines for patients in secondary and primary cardiovascular prevention. We assessed the association of potential statin overuse and underuse with six patient characteristics (age, gender, number of diagnoses, number of medications, mental impairment, being housebound) in LASSO-selection analyses.

Results

Of 715 multimorbid older adults (79.7 ± 6.5 years, 39.9% women), 337 (47%) were on statin. Statin therapy was appropriate in 474 (66.3%), underused in 130 (18.2%), and overused in 111 (15.5%) patients. In participants in secondary cardiovascular prevention (n = 437), being female (odds ratio [OR] 2.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.67-4.22) was significantly associated with potential underuse while being housebound (OR 3.53, 95%CI 1.32-9.46) and taking ≥10 medications (OR 1.95,95%CI 1.05-3.67) were associated with potential overuse. In participants in primary cardiovascular prevention (n = 278), 28.1% were potentially under- (9%) or overusing (19%) a statin, with no identified risk factor.

Conclusion

A third of hospitalized multimorbid older patients with polypharmacy potentially (either) overused or underused statin therapy. Among patients in secondary cardiovascular prevention, women were at risk for potential statin underuse. Housebound patients and those taking ≥10 medications were at risk for potential overuse of a statin. Physicians should carefully evaluate the indication for statin prescription in multimorbid older patients with polypharmacy.

Clinical relevance of potentially inappropriate medications and potential prescribing omissions according to explicit criteria-a validation study

PURPOSE

To investigate the clinical relevance of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs), and to evaluate the association between PIMs/PPOs and inadequate drug treatment.

METHODS

PIMs/PPOs, concordantly identified by two physicians applying the STOPP/START criteria, the EU(7)-PIM list, and a Swedish set in 302 consecutive older primary care patients, were assessed regarding clinical relevance for the specific patient. The physicians determined, in consensus, whether an action related to the medication was medically justified prior to the next regular consultation. If so, the drug treatment was categorised as inadequate, and if not, the treatment was considered adequate.

RESULTS

In all, 259 (86%) patients had 1010 PIMs/PPOs, 150 (15%) of which, in 81 (27%) patients, were assessed as clinically relevant (kappa: 0.26). A total of 75 (50%) clinically relevant PIMs and PPOs were prioritised for medical action before the next regular consultation. Action-requiring clinically relevant PIMs most often concerned acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) for primary prevention (four out of 68 patients on ASA). The corresponding PPOs concerned beta-blockers in ischaemic heart disease (four out of 61 patients with this condition). When an overall medical perspective was applied, 164 (63%) out of 259 patients with PIMs/PPOs were assessed as having adequate treatment. In adjusted logistic regression, number of PIMs and/or PPOs and number of drugs were associated with inadequate drug treatment.

CONCLUSION

One in seven PIMs/PPOs may be clinically relevant, half of these not of priority for medical action. Cautious interpretation is warranted when PIMs/PPOs are used as outcome measures.

Optimizing Therapy to Prevent Avoidable Hospital Admissions in Multimorbid Older Adults (OPERAM): cluster randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of optimising drug treatment on drug related hospital admissions in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy admitted to hospital.

DESIGN

Cluster randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

110 clusters of inpatient wards within university based hospitals in four European countries (Switzerland, Netherlands, Belgium, and Republic of Ireland) defined by attending hospital doctors.

PARTICIPANTS

2008 older adults (≥70 years) with multimorbidity (≥3 chronic conditions) and polypharmacy (≥5 drugs used long term).

INTERVENTION

Clinical staff clusters were randomised to usual care or a structured pharmacotherapy optimisation intervention performed at the individual level jointly by a doctor and a pharmacist, with the support of a clinical decision software system deploying the screening tool of older person's prescriptions and screening tool to alert to the right treatment (STOPP/START) criteria to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Primary outcome was first drug related hospital admission within 12 months.

RESULTS

2008 older adults (median nine drugs) were randomised and enrolled in 54 intervention clusters (963 participants) and 56 control clusters (1045 participants) receiving usual care. In the intervention arm, 86.1% of participants (n=789) had inappropriate prescribing, with a mean of 2.75 (SD 2.24) STOPP/START recommendations for each participant. 62.2% (n=491) had ≥1 recommendation successfully implemented at two months, predominantly discontinuation of potentially inappropriate drugs. In the intervention group, 211 participants (21.9%) experienced a first drug related hospital admission compared with 234 (22.4%) in the control group. In the intention-to-treat analysis censored for death as competing event (n=375, 18.7%), the hazard ratio for first drug related hospital admission was 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.17). In the per protocol analysis, the hazard ratio for a drug related hospital admission was 0.91 (0.69 to 1.19). The hazard ratio for first fall was 0.96 (0.79 to 1.15; 237 v 263 first falls) and for death was 0.90 (0.71 to 1.13; 172 v 203 deaths).

CONCLUSIONS

Inappropriate prescribing was common in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy admitted to hospital and was reduced through an intervention to optimise pharmacotherapy, but without effect on drug related hospital admissions. Additional efforts are needed to identify pharmacotherapy optimisation interventions that reduce inappropriate prescribing and improve patient outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02986425.

Deprescribing in Older People Approaching End of Life: A Randomized Controlled Trial Using STOPPFrail Criteria

OBJECTIVES

Older people approaching end of life are commonly prescribed multiple medications, many of which may be inappropriate or futile. Our objective was to examine the effect of applying the STOPPFrail, a recently developed deprescribing tool, to the medication regimens of older patients with advanced frailty.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Two acute hospitals in Ireland.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults 75 years or older (n = 130) with advanced frailty and polypharmacy (five or more drugs), transferring to long-term nursing home care.

INTERVENTION

A STOPPFrail-guided deprescribing plan was presented to attending physicians who judged whether or not to implement recommended medication changes.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the change in the number of regular medications at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included unscheduled hospital presentations, falls, quality of life, monthly medication costs, and mortality.

RESULTS

Intervention (n = 65) and control group (n = 65) participants were prescribed a mean (plus or minus standard deviation [SD]) of 11.5 (±3.0) and 10.9 (±3.5) medications, respectively, at baseline. The mean (SD) change in the number of medications at 3 months was -2.6 (±2.73) in the intervention group and -.36 (±2.60) in the control group (mean difference = 2.25 ± .54; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.18-3.32; P < .001). The mean change in monthly medication cost was -$74.97 (±$148.32) in the intervention group and -$13.22 (±$110.40) in the control group (mean difference $61.74 ± $26.60; 95% CI = 8.95-114.53; P = .02). No significant differences were found between groups for any of the other secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

STOPPFrail-guided deprescribing significantly reduced polypharmacy and medication costs in frail older people. No significant differences between groups were observed with regard to falls, hospital presentations, quality of life, and mortality, although the trial was likely underpowered to detect differences in these outcomes. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:762-769, 2020.

Inappropriate medication use in hospitalised oldest old patients across transitions of care

BACKGROUND

Oldest old patients aged 85 years and over are at risk of experiencing potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) across transitions of care. Geriatricians also face enormous challenges in prescribing medications for these patients.

METHODS

A mixed-methods, sequential explanatory design was undertaken of electronic medical records and semi-structured interviews with geriatricians at a public teaching hospital. Data were collected at four time points using the Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) and Screening Tool to Alert doctors to the Right Treatment (START).

RESULTS

Of 249 patients, the prevalence of at least 1 PIM varied between 36.9 and 51.0%, while the prevalence of at least 1 PPO varied between 36.9 and 44.6%. The most common PIM was use of proton pump inhibitors while the most common PPO was omission of vitamin D supplements in housebound patients or patients experiencing falls. Poisson regression analysis showed that PIMs were significantly associated with use of mobility aids, 1.430 (95% CI 1.109-1.843, p = 0.006), and number of medications prescribed at admission, 1.083 (95% CI 1.058-1.108, p < 0.001). PPOs were significantly associated with comorbidities, 1.172 (95% CI 1.073-1.280, p < 0.001), medications prescribed at admission, 0.989 (95% CI 0.978-0.999, p = 0.035), and length of stay, 1.004 (95% CI 1.002-1.006, p < 0.001). Geriatrician interviews (N = 9) revealed medication-related, health professional-related and patient-related challenges with managing medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Inappropriate prescribing is common in oldest old patients. Greater attention is needed on actively de-prescribing medications that are not beneficial and commencing medications that would be advantageous. Tailored strategies for improving prescribing practices are needed.

Comparing Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing Tools and Their Association With Patient Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To assess the agreement of several different measures of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in older people and compare their relationship with patient-reported outcomes.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study including participants in The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA).

SETTING

Waves 1 and 2 of TILDA, a nationally representative aging cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1753 community-dwelling TILDA participants with linked administrative pharmacy claims data on medications.

MEASUREMENTS

Potentially inappropriate medications were assessed using the Screening Tool of Older Persons' Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) v1, American Geriatrics Society (AGS) Beers Criteria® 2012, and relevant Assessing Care of Vulnerable Elders (ACOVE) v3 indicators. Potential prescribing omissions were assessed using the Screening Tool to Alert Doctors to the Right Treatment (START) v1 and ACOVE v3 indicators. Their agreement was assessed via κ statistics, and multivariate regression was used to assess relationships with emergency department visits, general practitioner (GP) visits, quality of life, and functional decline (increased assistance needed for activities of daily living).

RESULTS

There was slight agreement between STOPP and AGS Beers Criteria® (κ = 0.20) and ACOVE indicators (κ = 0.15), while agreement between AGS Beers Criteria® and ACOVE indicators was fair (κ = 0.31). Agreement was fair between START and ACOVE indicators (κ = 0.34). All measures of inappropriate medications were significantly associated with increased GP visits. Only exposure to two or more START indicators was associated with reduced quality of life (adjusted mean difference = -1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.92 to -0.33), and only two or more AGS Beers Criteria® were associated with functional decline (adjusted odds ratio = 2.11; 95% CI = 1.37-3.28). For omissions, both measures were associated with functional decline, but only ACOVE indicators were associated with increased GP visits.

CONCLUSION

Prevalence of PIP and relationships with outcomes can differ substantially between tools with little agreement. Choice of PIP measure for research or practice should be considered in light of the circumstances and requirements in each case. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:526-534, 2020.

Do the 2015 Beers Criteria predict medication-related harm in older adults? Analysis from a multicentre prospective study in the United Kingdom

PURPOSE

To investigate whether inappropriate prescribing, defined by the Beers Criteria, is associated with medication-related harm (MRH), hospital admission, and mortality in older adults in England.

METHODS

A multicentre, prospective cohort study recruited 1280 patients (median age 82 years) at hospital discharge. Patients were followed-up in the community by pharmacists for 8 weeks to identify MRH (harm from adverse drug reactions, non-adherence, and medication errors) and hospital admissions. One-year mortality was determined using hospital records. Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) were determined using the 2015 version of the Beers criteria. Logistic regression was used to investigate the relationship between patients prescribed PIMs and adverse outcomes.

RESULTS

Two hundred and seventy-six patients (22%) were prescribed one or more PIMs at hospital discharge. The main PIM classes prescribed at hospital discharge were benzodiazepines and related drugs (30%) and antidepressants (27%). 1116 out of 1280 patients completed follow-up and 413 (37%) experienced MRH. In 51 cases (12%), MRH was attributable to a PIM. There was no significant relationship between patients prescribed PIMs and overall MRH, hospital readmission or all-cause one-year mortality. Multiple PIMs at discharge was independently associated with an increased risk of ADR (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.03-5.23).

CONCLUSION

The prescribing of PIMs is common at hospital discharge of older adults in England. The 2015 Beers criteria have a limited clinical value to predict adverse outcomes following hospital discharge in this setting.

Rationale and design of OPtimising thERapy to prevent Avoidable hospital admissions in Multimorbid older people (OPERAM): a cluster randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Multimorbidity and polypharmacy are important risk factors for drug-related hospital admissions (DRAs). DRAs are often linked to prescribing problems (overprescribing and underprescribing), as well as non-adherence with drug regimens for different reasons. In this trial, we aim to assess whether a structured medication review compared with standard care can reduce DRAs in multimorbid older patients with polypharmacy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

OPtimising thERapy to prevent Avoidable hospital admissions in Multimorbid older people is a European multicentre, cluster randomised, controlled trial. Hospitalised patients ≥70 years with ≥3 chronic medical conditions and concurrent use of ≥5 chronic medications are included in the four participating study centres of Bern (Switzerland), Utrecht (The Netherlands), Brussels (Belgium) and Cork (Ireland). Patients treated by the same prescribing physician constitute a cluster, and clusters are randomised 1:1 to either standard care or Systematic Tool to Reduce Inappropriate Prescribing (STRIP) intervention with the help of a clinical decision support system, the STRIP Assistant. STRIP is a structured method performing customised medication reviews, based on Screening Tool of Older People's Prescriptions/Screening  Tool to Alert to Right Treatment criteria to detect potentially inappropriate prescribing. The primary endpoint is any DRA where the main reason or a contributory reason for the patient's admission is caused by overtreatment or undertreatment, and/or inappropriate treatment. Secondary endpoints include number of any hospitalisations, all-cause mortality, number of falls, quality of life, degree of polypharmacy, activities of daily living, patient's drug compliance, the number of significant drug-drug interactions, drug overuse and underuse and potentially inappropriate medication.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The local Ethics Committees in Switzerland, Ireland, The Netherlands and Belgium approved this trial protocol. We will publish the results of this trial in a peer-reviewed journal.

MAIN FUNDING

European Union's Horizon 2020 programme.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02986425 , SNCTP000002183 , NTR6012, U1111-1181-9400.

Quality of prescribing in older people from a broad family physician perspective: a descriptive pilot study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the quality of drug treatment in older people from a broad family physician perspective, and to provide evidence for power calculations in full-scale studies on prescribing quality.

DESIGN

Descriptive, retrospective pilot study.

SETTING

A primary healthcare centre in Sweden.

PARTICIPANTS

123 consecutive patients, ≥65 years, with a non-urgent physician consultation in January 2016.

MEASURES

The drug treatment was assessed by a physician as either appropriate or suboptimal, taking individual factors like morbidity, life expectancy and concurrent drug treatment into account, and preceded by the application of 493 criteria from three screening tools for Potentially Inappropriate Medications (PIMs) and Potential Prescribing Omissions (PPOs). Suboptimal drug treatment was further categorised regarding priority: (1) immediate change suggested or (2) actions suggested in the longer term. Prevalence of the procedure code 'medication review' and the results thereof were also recorded.

RESULTS

Median age: 76 years; 48% women. When a family physician perspective was applied, and 593 PIMs/PPOs identified in 117 (95%) patients considered, 45 (37%) patients had suboptimal drug treatment. Immediate handling was suggested in 13 (11%) patients, most often concerning withdrawals of drugs for anxiety and insomnia. Handling in the longer term was suggested in 32 (26%) patients, most often concerning overuse of proton pump inhibitors. Over the last year, the procedure code 'medication review' was recorded for 65 (53%) patients. In medication reviews recorded during January 2016 (n=45), 23 (7%) drugs out of 309 were acted on, most often a dosage adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study shows that when a broad family physician perspective is applied, taking individual factors and medical priorities in the complex clinical situation into account, drug treatment in primary care is appropriate for the majority of older patients. The results may be useful in sample size considerations for future studies on prescribing practices.

Can screening tools for potentially inappropriate prescriptions in older adults prevent serious adverse drug events?

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study is to identify and explore risk factors of serious adverse drug events (SADE) and SADE-related admissions in acutely hospitalized multimorbid older adults and assess whether these could have been prevented by adherence to the prescription tools Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions (STOPP) and The Norwegian General Practice (NORGEP) criteria.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study of acutely admitted patients to a medical department in a Norwegian regional hospital. Eligible patients were community-dwelling, receiving home care services, and aged 75+, with ≥ 3 chronic diseases. Medications and information regarding the admission were retrieved from the referral letter and medical records, while an expert panel identified SADE using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and SADE-related admissions.

RESULTS

We included 232 patients. Mean (SD) age was 86 (5.7) years, 137 (59%) were female, 121 (52%) used 5-9 drugs whereas 65 (28%) used ≥ 10. We identified SADEs in 72 (31%) of the patients, and in 49 (68%) of these cases, the SADE was considered to cause the hospital admission. A low body mass index (BMI) and a high Cumulative Illness Rating Scale-Geriatrics (CIRS-G) score were independent risk factors for SADEs. Among the SADEs identified, 32 (44%) and 11 (15%) were preventable by adherence to STOPP and NORGEP, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a high prevalence of SADE leading to hospitalization. Risk factors for SADE were high CIRS-G and low BMI. STOPP identified more SADEs than NORGEP, but adherence to the prescription tools could only to a limited degree prevent SADEs in this patient group.

Association of polypharmacy and hyperpolypharmacy with frailty states: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To investigate: (1) the cross-sectional association between polypharmacy, hyperpolypharmacy and presence of prefrailty or frailty; (2) the risk of incident prefrailty or frailty in persons with polypharmacy, and vice versa.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase from 01/01/1998 to 5/2/2018. Pooled estimates were obtained through random effect models and Mantel-Haenszel weighting. Homogeneity was assessed with the I² statistic and publication bias with Egger's and Begg's tests.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies were included. The pooled proportion of polypharmacy in persons with prefrailty and frailty was 47% (95% CI 33-61) and 59% (95% CI 42-76), respectively. Increased odds ratio of polypharmacy were seen for prefrail (pooled OR = 1.52; 95% CI 1.32-1.79) and frail persons (pooled OR = 2.62, 95% CI 1.81-3.79). Hyperpolypharmacy was also increased in prefrail (OR = 1.95; 95% CI 1.41-2.70) and frail (OR = 6.57; 95% CI 9.57-10.48) persons compared to robust persons. Only seven longitudinal studies reported data on the risk of either incident prefrailty or frailty in persons with baseline polypharmacy. A significant higher odds of developing prefrailty was found in robust persons with polypharmacy (pooled OR = 1.30; 95% CI 1.12-1.51). We found no papers investigating polypharmacy incidence in persons with prefrailty/frailty.

CONCLUSIONS

Polypharmacy is common in prefrail and frail persons, and these individuals are also more likely to be on extreme drug regimens, i.e. hyperpolypharmacy, than robust older persons. More research is needed to investigate the causal relationship between polypharmacy and frailty syndromes, thereby identifying ways to jointly reduce drug burden and prefrailty/frailty in these individuals.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018104756.

The PIPc Study-application of indicators of potentially inappropriate prescribing in children (PIPc) to a national prescribing database in Ireland: a cross-sectional prevalence study

OBJECTIVES

Evidence is limited regarding the quality of prescribing to children. The objective of this study was to apply a set of explicit prescribing indicators to a national pharmacy claims database (Primary Care Reimbursement Service) to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in children (PIPc) in primary care.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES MEASURES

To determine the overall prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in children in primary care. To examine the prevalence of PIPc by gender.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Cross-sectional study. Application of indicators of commission of PIP and omission of appropriate prescribing to a national prescribing database in Ireland.

PARTICIPANTS

Eligible children <16 years of age who were prescribed medication in 2014.

RESULTS

Overall prevalence of PIPc by commission was 3.5% (95% CI 3.5% to 3.6%) of eligible children <16 years of age who were prescribed medication in 2014. Overall prevalence of PIPc by omission was 2.5% (95% CI 2.5% to 2.6%) which rose to 11.5% (95% CI 11.4% to 11.7%) when prescribing of spacer devices for children with asthma was included. The most common individual PIPc by commission was the prescribing of carbocisteine to children (3.3% of eligible children). The most common PIPc by omission (after excluding spacer devices) was failure to prescribe an emollient to children prescribed greater than one topical corticosteroid (54% of eligible children). PIPc by omission was significantly higher in males compared with females (relative risk (RR) 1.3; 95% CI 1.0 to 1.7) but no different for PIPc by commission (RR 1.0; 95% CI 0.7 to 1.6).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that the overall prevalence of PIP in children is low, although results suggest room for improved adherence to asthma guidelines.

Inappropriate Prescribing in Elderly Inpatients at a University Hospital in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Elderly populations usually use more medications than any other age group and are therefore more susceptible to potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP), drug-drug interactions, and the related health consequences. In this study, we aimed to determine PIP prevalence and explore the most common potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) prescribed.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study involving elderly patients admitted at King Abdulaziz Medical City-Jeddah (KAMC-JD), between November 2014 and January 2015. We included all elderly patients aged 60 years and above admitted to KAMC-JD through the emergency department (ED), clinic, and direct admissions during the study period. Patients admitted to the intensive care unit, oncology department, and/or those who passed way in the ED before admission were excluded from the study. Prescriptions were assessed for PIP using the 2012 Beers Criteria, which categorizes PIMs to three classes: first class are medications to avoid in older adults regardless of their conditions; second class are medications to avoid with certain diseases or syndromes; and third class are medications that should be used with caution.

RESULTS

Our study included 135 patients, of which 49.6% were males. The mean age was 71.26 ± 8.1 years. According to the 2012 Beers Criteria, 80% of patients were using at least one listed PIM. For the Criteria's first, second, and third classes, PIM prescription rates were 72.6%, 59.2%, and 37.7%, respectively. Regarding the most prescribed PIM in each class, insulin (sliding scale) was the most reported PIM in the first class, NSAIDs in the second class, and, lastly, vasodilators in the third class.

CONCLUSION

PIP is a serious health issue threatening elderly patients. There is a need to develop evidence-based, context-sensitive, and user-friendly tools to assess PIP, as well as supportive training programs.

Incidence and cost of medication harm in older adults following hospital discharge: a multicentre prospective study in the UK

Aims

Polypharmacy is increasingly common in older adults, placing them at risk of medication‐related harm (MRH). Patients are particularly vulnerable to problems with their medications in the period following hospital discharge due to medication changes and poor information transfer between hospital and primary care. The aim of the present study was to investigate the incidence, severity, preventability and cost of MRH in older adults in England postdischarge.

Methods

An observational, multicentre, prospective cohort study recruited 1280 older adults (median age 82 years) from five teaching hospitals in Southern England, UK. Participants were followed up for 8 weeks by senior pharmacists, using three data sources (hospital readmission review, participant telephone interview and primary care records), to identify MRH and associated health service utilization.

Results

Overall, 413 participants (37%) experienced MRH (556 MRH events per 1000 discharges), of which 336 (81%) cases were serious and 214 (52%) potentially preventable. Four participants experienced fatal MRH. The most common MRH events were gastrointestinal (n = 158, 25%) or neurological (n = 111, 18%). The medicine classes associated with the highest risk of MRH were opiates, antibiotics and benzodiazepines. A total of 328 (79%) participants with MRH sought healthcare over the 8‐week follow‐up. The incidence of MRH‐associated hospital readmission was 78 per 1000 discharges. Postdischarge MRH in older adults is estimated to cost the National Health Service £396 million annually, of which £243 million is potentially preventable.

Conclusions

MRH is common in older adults following hospital discharge, and results in substantial use of healthcare resources.

Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing in Older Adults with Hypertension or Diabetes Mellitus and Hypertension in a Primary Care Setting in Bahrain

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to evaluate: (1) the prevalence and types of potentially inappropriate prescribing in older adults with hypertension or diabetes mellitus and hypertension, and (2) whether or not differences in the training of primary care physicians were associated with potentially inappropriate prescribing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Primary care prescriptions issued by family physicians and general practitioners were audited using Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions criteria (version 1), with 18 out of 65 applicable criteria. Descriptive statistics were used to test the difference between proportions, and two-tailed t test was used for continuous variables.

RESULTS

A total of 2,090 outpatient prescriptions were written during the study period; of these, 712 (34.1%) were potentially inappropriate. The mean number of drugs per patient was 6.03 (±2.5). Of the 712 prescriptions, 543 (76.3%) were used for the treatment of acute medical illnesses. The most common examples of potentially inappropriate prescribing were: orphenadrine (n = 174; 8.33%), long-term nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for > 3 months (n = 150; 7.18%), proton pump inhibitors for > 8 weeks (n = 135; 6.46%), antihypertensive therapy duplication (n = 59; 2.82%), long-acting glyburide (n = 48; 2.29%), and chlordiazepoxide for > 1 month (n = 44; 2.11%). Family physicians showed a greater tendency toward potentially inappropriate prescribing compared to general practitioners, but the difference was nonsignificant (n = 514 [34.75%] vs. n = 162 [31.3%]; p = 0.16).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing (i.e., 34.1%) was within the spectrum reported worldwide and unrelated to the training backgrounds of physicians. Most of the identified potentially inappropriate prescribing (76.3%) in older adults was associated with medications for acute medical illnesses and hence inappropriate polypharmacy should be discouraged.

Analysis of polypharmacy effects in older patients using Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report database

Population aging is a global phenomenon, and choosing appropriate medical care for the elderly is critical. Polypharmacy is suspected to increase the risk of adverse events (AEs) in older patients. We examined the AE profiles associated with polypharmacy and aging using the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report (JADER) database. We attempted to mitigate the effect of patient-related factors using a multiple-logistic regression technique and data subsetting. We selected case reports for AEs as specified in the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA). The association between polypharmacy and "renal disorder" or "hepatic disorder" was evaluated using reporting odds ratio (ROR) and adjusted for covariates using multiple-logistic regression. For renal disorder, advanced polypharmacy showed higher adjusted RORs, because the value of administered drugs group [1.82 (1.76-1.88), ≥ 10] was higher than that of the number of administered drugs group [1.27 (1.24-1.31), 5-9]. The lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of adjusted ROR for age (≥ 60 years) was > 1 for renal disorder. For hepatic disorder, the adjusted RORs were as follows: 1.17 (1.14-1.20) for the number of administered drugs group (5-9) and 1.14 (1.11-1.18) for the number of administered drugs group (≥ 10). The adjusted RORs of hepatic disorder compared to those of renal disorder had lower adjusted RORs related to the increase in the number of administered drugs. Therefore, elderly individuals should be closely monitored for the occurrence of renal disorder when they are subjected to polypharmacy. This approach might apply to the simultaneous evaluation of the AE risk of polypharmacy and aging.

Implementing a screening tool to improve prescribing in hospitalized older patients: a pilot study

Background The use of STOPP-START criteria during hospitalization reduced inappropriate medications in randomized controlled trials. Objective To evaluate whether the implementation of a screening tool (short version of STOPP-START criteria) in routine geriatric practice reduces potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) and potential prescribing omissions (PPO) at discharge. Methods We conducted a retrospective interrupted time series analysis. Four periods were selected between February and September 2013: (1) baseline situation; (2) screening tool made available to physicians; (3) 3 months later; (4) weekly meetings with junior doctors and a clinical pharmacist to review treatments according to the tool. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with prescribing improvement from admission to discharge. Results We included 120 patients (median age 85 years). The prevalence of PIMs and PPOs on admission was 56% (67/120) and 51% (61/120) respectively. Hospitalization improved prescribing appropriateness in 49% of patients with PIMs (33/67) and 39% of patients with PPOs (24/61). The use of the screening tool by way of multidisciplinary meetings was a predictor of PIMs reduction at discharge. Conclusions The sole distribution of a screening tool in a geriatric unit did not reduce PIMs and PPOs. Multidisciplinary meetings to review treatments should be encouraged.

Potentially inappropriate medications in hospitalized older patients: a cross-sectional study using the Beers 2015 criteria versus the 2012 criteria

AIM

Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are prominent prescribing issues in elderly patients. The purpose of the study was to investigate the prevalence of PIMs identified by the Beers 2015 and 2012 criteria in older patients in China and identify the correlates of PIMs.

METHODS

This retrospective, cross-sectional study was conducted at Peking University First Hospital. The Beers 2015 and 2012 criteria were applied to evaluate PIMs among hospitalized patients. The associations between PIM use and independent variables were analyzed by logistic regression. The differences between PIM use according to Beers 2012 and 2015 criteria were calculated using chi-squared and kappa tests.

RESULTS

A total of 456 patients were analyzed; 244 (53.5%) and 204 (44.7%) patients had at least one PIM identified by the Beers 2015 and 2012 criteria, respectively. The most frequent PIMs were proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs), benzodiazepines, and benzodiazepine receptor agonists according to the Beers 2015 criteria. PIMs identified by the Beers 2015 criteria were associated with excessive polypharmacy (OR 1.864, 95% CI 1.210-2.871), a Barthel index ≤60 (OR 1.935, 95% CI 1.056-3.546), and the length of stay (OR 1.066, 95% CI 1.037-1.097). PIM use increased significantly between two criteria (chi-squared test, P<0.001), but good accordance was found between the previous and updated criteria (kappa test 0.782, P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed a high prevalence of PIM use in China, which was associated with various correlates. The Beers 2015 criteria detected significantly more PIMs than the 2012 criteria due to the inclusion of PPIs.

Inappropriate prescribing among older persons in primary care: protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

INTRODUCTION

Inappropriate prescribing has a significant impact on older persons in primary care. Previous reviews on inappropriate prescribing included a heterogeneous range of populations and may not be generalisable to primary care. In this study we aim to conduct a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence, risk factors and adverse outcome associated with inappropriate prescribing, specifically among older persons in primary care.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO and references of other review articles for observational studies related to the keywords 'older persons', 'primary care' and 'inappropriate prescribing'. Two reviewers will independently select the eligible articles. For each included article, the two reviewers will independently extract the data and assess the risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. If appropriate, meta-analyses will be performed to pool the data across all the studies. In the presence of heterogeneity, meta-regression and subgroup analyses will also be performed. The quality of the evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The results will be disseminated through conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. They will provide consolidated evidence to support informed actions by policymakers to address inappropriate prescribing in primary care, thus reducing preventable and iatrogenic risk to older persons in primary care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016048874.

PIPc study: development of indicators of potentially inappropriate prescribing in children (PIPc) in primary care using a modified Delphi technique

OBJECTIVE

There is limited evidence regarding the quality of prescribing for children in primary care. Several prescribing criteria (indicators) have been developed to assess the appropriateness of prescribing in older and middle-aged adults but few are relevant to children. The objective of this study was to develop a set of prescribing indicators that can be applied to prescribing or dispensing data sets to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in children (PIPc) in primary care settings.

DESIGN

Two-round modified Delphi consensus method.

SETTING

Irish and UK general practice.

PARTICIPANTS

A project steering group consisting of academic and clinical general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists was formed to develop a list of indicators from literature review and clinical expertise. 15 experts consisting of GPs, pharmacists and paediatricians from the Republic of Ireland and the UK formed the Delphi panel.

RESULTS

47 indicators were reviewed by the project steering group and 16 were presented to the Delphi panel. In the first round of this exercise, consensus was achieved on nine of these indicators. Of the remaining seven indicators, two were removed following review of expert panel comments and discussion of the project steering group. The second round of the Delphi process focused on the remaining five indicators, which were amended based on first round feedback. Three indicators were accepted following the second round of the Delphi process and the remaining two indicators were removed. The final list consisted of 12 indicators categorised by respiratory system (n=6), gastrointestinal system (n=2), neurological system (n=2) and dermatological system (n=2).

CONCLUSIONS

The PIPc indicators are a set of prescribing criteria developed for use in children in primary care in the absence of clinical information. The utility of these criteria will be tested in further studies using prescribing databases.

The feasibility and effect of deprescribing in older adults on mortality and health: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Deprescribing is a suggested intervention to reverse the potential iatrogenic harms of inappropriate polypharmacy. The review aimed to determine whether or not deprescribing is a safe, effective and feasible intervention to modify mortality and health outcomes in older adults.

METHODS

Specified databases were searched from inception to February 2015. Two researchers independently screened all retrieved articles for inclusion, assessed study quality and extracted data. Data were pooled using RevMan v5.3. Eligible studies included those where older adults had at least one medication deprescribed. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes were adverse drug withdrawal events, psychological and physical health outcomes, quality of life, and medication usage (e.g. successful deprescribing, number of medications prescribed, potentially inappropriate medication use).

RESULTS

A total of 132 papers met the inclusion criteria, which included 34 143 participants aged 73.8 ± 5.4 years. In nonrandomized studies, deprescribing polypharmacy was shown to significantly decrease mortality (OR 0.32, 95% CI: 0.17-0.60). However, this was not statistically significant in the randomized studies (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.61-1.11). Subgroup analysis revealed patient-specific interventions to deprescribe demonstrated a significant reduction in mortality (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43-0.88). However, generalized educational programmes did not change mortality (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.86-1.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Although nonrandomized data suggested that deprescribing reduces mortality, deprescribing was not shown to alter mortality in randomized studies. Mortality was significantly reduced when applying patient-specific interventions to deprescribe in randomized studies.

Too many, too few, or too unsafe? Impact of inappropriate prescribing on mortality, and hospitalization in a cohort of community-dwelling oldest old

AIMS

Little is known about the impact of inappropriate prescribing (IP) in community-dwelling adults, aged 80 years and older. The prevalence at baseline (November 2008September 2009) and impact of IP (misuse and underuse) after 18 months on mortality and hospitalization in a cohort of community-dwelling adults, aged 80 years and older (n = 503) was studied.

METHODS

Screening Tool of Older People's Prescriptions (STOPP-2, misuse) and Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START-2, underuse) criteria were cross-referenced and linked to the medication use (in Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical coding) and clinical problems. Survival analysis until death or first hospitalization was performed at 18 months after inclusion using Kaplan-Meier, with Cox regression to control for covariates.

RESULTS

Mean age was 84.4 (range 80-102) years. Mean number of medications prescribed was 5 (range 0-16). Polypharmacy (≥5 medications, 58%), underuse (67%) and misuse (56%) were high. Underuse and misuse coexisted in 40% and were absent in 17% of the population. A higher number of prescribed medications was correlated with more misused medications (r_s  = .51, P < 0.001) and underused medications (r_s  = .26, P < 0.001). Mortality and hospitalization rate were 8.9%, and 31.0%, respectively. After adjustment for number of medications and misused medications, there was an increased risk of mortality (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.10, 1.76) and hospitalization (HR 1.26, 95% CI 1.10, 1.45) for every additional underused medication. Associations with misuse were less clear.

CONCLUSION

IP (polypharmacy, underuse and misuse) was highly prevalent in adults, aged 80 years and older. Surprisingly, underuse and not misuse had strong associations with mortality and hospitalization.