[Polypharmacy in older people].

After the publication of the guidelines about the safe drug therapy for older people in 2015 by the Japan Geriatrics Society, the risk of polypharmacy has become popular. Older people are likely to have multimorbidity, resulting in the use of multiple drugs. This not only increases the frequency of side effects, but also increase confusion and difficulty in medication management and adherence. Polypharmacy is the problem related to these complicated drug therapies and will increase by age. It is necessary to review drugs and resolve polypharmacy without making comorbid conditions worth. To carry out effective medication reviews, the guidance established by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare introduced that geriatric assessment is essential for those with polypharmacy, since not only all medical conditions, but also physical and cognitive functions, medications, living environment, and caregivers should be taken into consideration when discontinuing drugs. When tapering, potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) should be always the targets, and PIMs drug lists such as the Beers criteria and STOPP/START became very popular in overseas. Even after the reductions, careful attention should be paid to changes in the patient's condition. For drugs that are continued, continuous checks are required to ensure compliance with patients' medication adherence. There are many possible reasons for poor medication adherence, and it will be difficult to improve unless we identify what the cause is in each patient, and making the prescriptions simple may be necessary.

Influence of chronic medical conditions on older patients' willingness to deprescribe medications: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Aging correlates with a heightened prevalence of chronic diseases, resulting in multimorbidity affecting 60% of those aged 65 or older. Multimorbidity often leads to polypharmacy, elevating the risk of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use and adverse health outcomes. To address these issues, deprescribing has emerged as a patient-centered approach that considers patients' beliefs and attitudes toward medication and reduces inappropriate polypharmacy in older adults. Our study aims to investigate whether certain chronic medical conditions are associated with older patients' willingness to deprescribe medications. METHODS: A cross-sectional study enrolled 192 community-dwelling individuals aged 65 or older taking at least one regular medication. Data included demographics, clinical characteristics, and responses to the Portuguese revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire. Descriptive statistics characterized participants, while multiple binary logistic regression identified associations between chronic medical conditions and willingness to deprescribe. RESULTS: Among the participants (median age: 72 years, 65.6% female), 91.6% had multimorbidity. The analysis revealed that willingness to deprescribe significantly increased with the presence of gastric disease (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 4.123; 95% CI 1.221, 13.915) and age (aOR = 1.121; 95% CI 1.009, 1.246). Conversely, prostatic pathology (aOR = 0.266; 95% CI 0.077, 0.916), higher scores in the rPATD appropriateness factor (aOR = 0.384; 95% CI 0.190, 0.773), and rPATD concerns about stopping factor (aOR = 0.450; 95% CI 0.229, 0.883) diminished patients' willingness to deprescribe. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the intricate relationship between older patients' attitudes toward deprescribing and chronic medical conditions. We found that gastric disease was associated with an increased willingness to deprescribe medications, while prostate disease was associated with the opposite effect. Future research should explore how patients with specific diseases or groups of diseases perceive deprescribing of medications general and for specific medications, aiding in the development of targeted interventions.

Potentially inappropriate prescribing for people with dementia in ambulatory care: a cross-sectional observational study.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is highly prevalent among people with dementia (PwD) and linked to negative outcomes, such as hospitalisation and mortality. However, there are limited data on prescribing appropriateness for PwD in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, we aimed to estimate the prevalence of PIP and investigate associations between PIP and other patient characteristics among PwD in an ambulatory care setting. METHODS: A cross-sectional, retrospective analysis was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Saudi Arabia. Patients who were ≥ 65 years old, had dementia, and visited ambulatory care clinics between 01/01/2019 and 31/12/2021 were included. Prescribing appropriateness was evaluated by applying the Screening Tool of Older Persons Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria. Descriptive analyses were used to describe the study population. Prevalence of PIP and the prevalence per each STOPP criterion were calculated as a percentage of all eligible patients. Logistic regression analysis was used to investigate associations between PIP, polypharmacy, age and sex; odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Analyses were conducted using SPSS v27. RESULTS: A total of 287 PwD were identified; 56.0% (n = 161) were female. The mean number of medications prescribed was 9.0 [standard deviation (SD) ± 4.2]. The prevalence of PIP was 61.0% (n = 175). Common instances of PIP were drugs prescribed beyond the recommended duration (n = 90, 31.4%), drugs prescribed without an evidence-based clinical indication (n = 78, 27.2%), proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for > 8 weeks (n = 75, 26.0%), and acetylcholinesterase inhibitors with concurrent drugs that reduce heart rate (n = 60, 21.0%). Polypharmacy was observed in 82.6% (n = 237) of patients and was strongly associated with PIP (adjusted OR 24.1, 95% CI 9.0-64.5). CONCLUSIONS: Findings have revealed a high prevalence of PIP among PwD in Saudi Arabia that is strongly associated with polypharmacy. Future research should aim to explore key stakeholders' experiences and perspectives of medicines management to optimise medication use for this vulnerable patient population.

Developing a PRogram to Educate and Sensitize Caregivers to Reduce the Inappropriate Prescription Burden in the Elderly with Alzheimer's Disease (D-PRESCRIBE-AD): Trial protocol and rationale of an open-label pragmatic, prospective randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Potentially inappropriate prescribing of medications in older adults, particular those with dementia, can lead to adverse drug events including falls and fractures, worsening cognitive impairment, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. Educational mailings from health plans to patients and their providers to encourage deprescribing conversations may represent an effective, low-cost, "light touch", approach to reducing the burden of potentially inappropriate prescription use in older adults with dementia. OBJECTIVES: The objective of the Developing a PRogram to Educate and Sensitize Caregivers to Reduce the Inappropriate Prescription Burden in Elderly with Alzheimer's Disease (D-PRESCRIBE-AD) trial is to evaluate the effect of a health plan based multi-faceted educational outreach intervention to community dwelling patients with dementia who are currently prescribed sedative/hypnotics, antipsychotics, or strong anticholinergics. METHODS: The D-PRESCRIBE-AD is an open-label pragmatic, prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing three arms: 1) educational mailing to both the health plan patient and their prescribing physician (patient plus physician arm, n = 4814); 2) educational mailing to prescribing physician only (physician only arm, n = 4814); and 3) usual care (n = 4814) among patients with dementia enrolled in two large United States based health plans. The primary outcome is the absence of any dispensing of the targeted potentially inappropriate prescription during the 6-month study observation period after a 3-month black out period following the mailing. Secondary outcomes include dose-reduction, polypharmacy, healthcare utilization, mortality and therapeutic switching within targeted drug classes. CONCLUSION: This large pragmatic RCT will contribute to the evidence base on promoting deprescribing of potentially inappropriate medications among older adults with dementia. If successful, such light touch, inexpensive and highly scalable interventions have the potential to reduce the burden of potentially inappropriate prescribing for patients with dementia. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05147428.

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

PURPOSE: This study aims to identify PIM prevalence in older adults according to the 2019 Beers criteria, Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions version 2 (STOPP v2) criteria, and the Portuguese EU(7)-PIM list and also to analyze the concordance between these criteria. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted among 1200 Portuguese older adults (≥ 65 years old), users of primary health care. Demographic, clinical, and pharmacological data were collected concerning the period between April 2021 and August 2022. A comparative analysis was performed between the three PIM identification criteria, and the concordance was determined according to the Lin concordance correlation coefficient. RESULTS: The mean age was 76.3 (SD 7.7) years old and 57.6% of the older adults were females. Our findings indicate varying prevalence rates among these criteria with 63.8% (95% CI 61.0-66.6%), 66.8% (95% CI 64.1-69.5%), and 50.1% (95% CI 47.2-53.0%) of the older adults take at least one PIM according to the EU(7)-PIM list, Beers 2019, and STOPP v2 criteria, respectively. The highest prevalence observed was for proton pump inhibitors according to EU(7)-PIM list (30.1%, 95% CI 27.6-32.9) and Beers criteria (30.1%, 95% CI 27.6-32.9) and alprazolam according to STOPP v2 criteria (10.1%, 95% CI 8.4-11.9%). A poor concordance between criteria was observed (< 0.834). The highest concordance coefficient was found between the EU(7)-PIM list and the Beers criteria (0.833), and the lowest between the EU(7)-PIM list and STOPP criteria (0.735). CONCLUSION: This study reveals varying prevalence rates of PIM in older adults, as assessed by different criteria, and highlights the need for targeted interventions and improved prescribing practices. In the future, studies should focus on the occurrence of negative outcomes in older adults associated with PIM consumption.

Decreasing polypharmacy in older adults with cancer: A pilot cluster-randomized trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Polypharmacy is prevalent in older adults with cancer and associated with multiple adverse outcomes. A single-site, cluster-randomized clinical trial will enroll older adults with cancer and polypharmacy starting chemotherapy and will assess the effectiveness and feasibility of deprescribing interventions by comparing two arms: a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention and a patient educational brochure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study will be conducted in two phases. In phase I, focus groups and semi-structured individual interviews will guide adaptation of deprescribing interventions for the oncology clinic (phase Ia), and eight patients will undergo the pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention with iterative adaptations (phase Ib). In phase II, a pilot cluster-randomized trial (n = 72) will compare a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention with a patient education brochure, with treating oncologists as the cluster. Both efficacy (relative dose intensity of planned chemotherapy, potentially inappropriate medications successfully deprescribed, chemotherapy toxicity, functional status, hospitalizations, falls, and symptoms) and implementation outcomes (barriers and facilitators) will be assessed. DISCUSSION: This study is anticipated to provide pilot data to inform a nationwide randomized clinical trial of deprescribing in older adults starting cancer treatment. The cluster randomization is intended to provide an initial estimate for the intervention effect as well as oncologists' intra-class correlation coefficient. Deprescribing interventions may improve outcomes in older adults starting cancer treatment, but these interventions are understudied in this population, and it is unknown how best to implement them into oncology practice. The results of this trial will inform the design of large, randomized phase III trials of deprescribing. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier:NCT05046171. Date of registration: September 16, 2021.

Potentially inappropriate medication use among older adults with lower-limb loss.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of, and explore factors related to, prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) among older adults with lower-limb loss (LLL). METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional dataset collected through an interdisciplinary limb loss clinic between September 2013 and November 2022. Self-report medication lists were reviewed during in-clinic face-to-face interviews and compared to the American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria corresponding to the patient's evaluation year. RESULTS: Of 82 participants (72.9 ± 6.6 years-old; 78.0 % male), n = 41 (50.0 %) reported using one or more PIM. PIM prescription was significantly associated with presence of phantom limb pain, history of upper gastrointestinal issues, and a greater number of medications. DISCUSSION: Polypharmacy and PIM use are common among older adults with LLL. Greater attention should be paid to medications post-amputation, especially pain management medications, to minimize potential adverse side-effects.

The association between healthcare expenditures and potentially inappropriate medication use in hospitalized older adults in Ethiopia.

BACKGROUND: Evidence shows that potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in older adults significantly increases the utilization of healthcare resources. PIM is widely prescribed in older adults, however little is known about its association with healthcare resource utilization in Africa, particularly Ethiopia. Therefore, the primary aim of this study was to examine the presence of an association between healthcare expenditure and the frequency of PIM used. METHODS: This observational study was conducted from 06 September 2021 to 30 December 2022. A total of 151 hospitalized older adult patients were included in the study. The data collection format was designed to capture relevant information. STATA V.15.0 was used for analysis. Descriptive statistics and a generalized linear model regression were conducted. Statistical significance was set at a p-value < 0.05. The findings are presented in tables, figures, and text. RESULTS: The total healthcare expenditure was higher in PIM users (385,368.6 ETB) than in non-PIM users (131,267.7 ETB). The median expenditures for medical supplies (p = 0.025), investigations (p = 0.033), and total healthcare expenditure (p = 0.023) were significantly higher in patients with two and more PIMs than in those with no or one PIM. However, after model adjustment, the total healthcare expenditure was not significantly different across the frequency of PIMs used. Number of medications (adjusted B = 0.068, 95% CI: 0.035, 0.101, p < 0.001) and taking blood and blood-forming organ class of medication (adjusted B = 0.151, 95% CI: 0.005, 0.297, p = 0.042) were associated with higher total healthcare expenditure, whereas the total healthcare expenditure was significantly lower in those patients with diseases of the nervous system (adjusted B = -0.307, 95% CI: -0.502, -0.112, p = 0.002) and respiratory system (adjusted B = -0.196, 95% CI: -0.327, -0.065, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The total healthcare expenditure is nearly three times higher in PIM users. However, its association with the frequency of PIM use was not statistically significant in the final model. Deprescribing medications after evaluating the benefit-risk ratio may help to reduce the healthcare expenditures of older adult patients. Further similar, adequately powered, comparative study is also warranted to identify the actual effect of PIM use on healthcare expenditures in the local context.

Deintensification of potentially inappropriate medications amongst older frail people with type 2 diabetes: Protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial (D-MED study).

AIMS: Amongst elderly people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) over prescribing can result in emergency ambulance call-outs, falls and fractures and increased mortality, particularly in frail patients. Current clinical guidelines, however, remain focused on medication intensification rather than deintensification where appropriate. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an electronic decision-support system and training for the deintensification of potentially inappropriate medications amongst older frail people with T2D, when compared to 'usual' care at 12-months. METHODS: This study is an open-label, multi-site, two-armed pragmatic cluster-randomised trial. GP practices randomised to the 'enhanced care' group have an electronic decision support system installed and receive training on the tool and de-intensification of diabetes medications. The system flags eligible patients for possible deintensification of diabetes medications, linking the health care professional to a clinical algorithm. The primary outcome will be the number of patients at 12-months who have had potentially inappropriate diabetes medications de-intensified. RESULTS: Study recruitment commenced in June 2022. Data collection commenced in January 2023. Baseline data have been extracted from 40 practices (3145 patients). CONCLUSIONS: Digital technology, involving computer decision systems, may have the potential to reduce inappropriate medications and aid the process of de-intensification. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN53221378. Available at: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN53221378.

Chronic benzodiazepine usage among older people: prevalence, indications, and treatment modifications in patients admitted to an acute geriatric unit.

AIM: To investigate the prevalence and indications of benzodiazepines (BZD) usage among patients admitted to an acute geriatric unit and assess changes in prescriptions. METHODS: BZD indications were documented reviewing clinical records, with appropriateness assessed based on the STOPP-START criteria. Changes in BZD prescriptions were recorded at discharge and 3 months later. RESULTS: Among the 366 patients included (mean age: 92.8 years, 68% females), 91 (24.9%) were on BZD upon admission, being inappropriate in 93.4%. At discharge, BZD discontinuation was observed in 40.7% and dose reduction initiated in 57.4%. Among patients discharged without prescriptions, 10.8% resumed their use at 3 months. Of those discharged with BZD tapering, 74.1% were still on them 3 months later. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients employing BZD lacked a medical indication. Admission to a geriatric ward resulted in successful discontinuation or dose reduction for most patients but was not maintained in the outpatient setting.

Patterns of inappropriate prescribing and clinical characteristics in patients at admission to an acute care of the elderly unit.

PURPOSE: Inappropriate prescribing (IP) is common among the elderly and is associated with adverse health outcomes. The role of different patterns of IP in clinical practice remains unclear. The aim of this study is to analyse the characteristics of different patterns of IP in hospitalized older adults. METHODS: This is a prospective observational study conducted in the acute care of elderly (ACE) unit of an acute hospital in Barcelona between June and August 2021. Epidemiological and demographic data were collected, and a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) was performed on admitted patients. Four patterns of inappropriate prescribing were identified: extreme polypharmacy (10 or more drugs), potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) and anticholinergic burden. RESULTS: Among 93 admitted patients (51.6% male, mean age of 82.83), the main diagnosis was heart failure (36.6%). Overprescribing patterns (extreme polypharmacy, PIMs, PPOs and anticholinergic burden) were associated with higher comorbidity, increased dependence on instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) and greater prevalence of dementia. Underprescribing (omissions) was associated with important comorbidity, residence in nursing homes, an increased risk of malnutrition, higher social risk and greater frailty. Comparing different patterns of IP, patients with high anticholinergic burden exhibited more extreme polypharmacy and PIMs. In the case of omissions, no association was identified with other IP patterns. CONCLUSIONS: We found statistically significant association between patterns of inappropriate prescribing and clinical and CGA variables such as comorbidity, dependency, dementia or frailty. There is a statistically significant association between patterns of overprescribing among patients admitted to the ACE unit.

Are Lists of Potentially Inappropriate Medications Associated with Hospital Readmissions? A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Suboptimal prescribing, including the prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIM), is frequent in patients aged 65 years and older. PIMs are associated with adverse drug events, which may lead to hospital admissions and readmissions for the most serious cases. Several tools, known as lists of PIMs, can detect suboptimal prescription. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to identify which lists of PIMs are associated with hospital readmission of older patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for the period from 1 January 1991 up to 12 May 2022 to identify original studies assessing the association between PIMs and hospital readmissions or emergency department (ED) revisits within 30 days of discharge in older patients. This study is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 Checklist, and the risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for Cohort Studies (NOS) and the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). RESULTS: A total of six studies presenting four different lists of PIMs were included. Readmission rates varied from 4.3 to 25.5% and the odds ratio (OR) between PIMs and hospital readmission varied from 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59; 1.42] to 6.48 [95% CI 3.00; 14.00]. Only two studies found a statistically significant association between a list of PIMs and hospital readmission. These two studies used different tools: the Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions (STOPP) and the Screening Tool to Alert Doctors to Right Treatment (START) and a combination of Beers Criteria® and STOPP and START. CONCLUSION: This systematic review shows that the association between list of PIMs and 30-day unplanned readmissions remains unclear and seems dependent on the PIM detection tool. Further studies are needed to clarify this association. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021252107.

Prevalence and Appropriateness of Polypharmacy in Older Adults with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.

BACKGROUND: Despite the growing prevalence of older adults with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), polypharmacy, an important geriatric construct, is poorly understood. We described polypharmacy and its implications in older adults with IBD. METHODS: In a cross sectional study of adults ≥ 60 years with IBD, we obtained medication lists from the medical record and patients. We assessed medications by the Beer's criteria, anti-cholinergic burden and drug-drug interactions. We constructed multi-variate logistic regression models to assess association between polypharmacy with low quality-of-life, controlling for age, sex, IBD-type, number of comorbidities and depression. RESULTS: In 100 adults ≥ 60 years with IBD, with a median age of 68 years, 56% met criteria for remission by a validated disease activity index. Polypharmacy, defined as ≥ 5 concomitant medications, was noted in 86% of the cohort and 45% had severe polypharmacy, defined as ≥ 10 concomitant medications. In this cohort, 48% were on ≥ 1 medication that met Beer's criteria for potentially inappropriate in older adults and 24% had a cumulative anti-cholinergic drug burden score of ≥ 3, the threshold for serious adverse events attributed to anti-cholinergic burden. Serious drug-drug interactions were found in 26% with 7% involving an IBD medication. Controlling for potential confounders, polypharmacy, defined both numerically (OR 22.79, p < 0.01) and by medication appropriateness (OR 1.95, p < 0.01), was significantly associated with low quality of life. CONCLUSION: Polypharmacy is prevalent in older adults with IBD and independently associated with low quality of life. Describing polypharmacy can guide de-prescription strategies tailored to GI clinic for older adults with IBD.

Assessing deprescribing tools for implementation in care homes: A qualitative study of the views of care home staff.

BACKGROUND: Care home residents often experience polypharmacy (defined as taking five or more regular medicines). Therefore, we need to ensure that residents only take the medications that are appropriate or provide value (also known as medicines optimisation). To achieve this, deprescribing, or the reduction or stopping of prescription medicines that may no longer be providing benefit, can help manage polypharmacy and improve outcomes. Various tools, guides, and approaches have been developed to help support health professionals to deprescribe in regular practice. Little evaluation of these tools has been conducted and no work has been done in the care home setting. OBJECTIVE: This qualitative study aimed to assess distinct types of deprescribing tools for acceptability, feasibility, and suitability for the care home setting. METHODS: Cognitive (think-aloud) interviews with care home staff in England were conducted (from December 2021 to June 2022) to assess five different deprescribing tools. The tools included a general deprescribing guidance, a generic (non-drug specific) deprescribing framework, a drug-specific deprescribing guideline/guide, a tool for identifying potentially inappropriate medications, and an electronic clinical decision support tool. Participants were recruited via their participation in another deprescribing study. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research informed the data collection and analysis. RESULTS: Eight care home staff from 7 different care homes were interviewed. The five deprescribing tools were reviewed and assessed as not acceptable, feasible, or suitable for the care home setting. All would require significant modifications for use in the care home setting (e.g., language, design, and its function or use with different stakeholders). CONCLUSIONS: As none of the tools were deemed acceptable, feasible, and suitable, future work is warranted to develop and tailor deprescribing tools for the care home setting, considering its specific context and users. Deprescribing implemented safely and successfully in care homes can benefit residents and the wider health economy.

How does deprescribing (not) reduce mortality? A review of a meta-analysis in community-dwelling older adults casts uncertainty over claimed benefits.

Some meta-analyses suggest that deprescribing may reduce mortality. Our aim was to determine the underlying factors contributing to this observed reduction. We analysed data from 12 randomized controlled trials included in the latest meta-analysis on deprescribing in community-dwelling older adults. Our analysis focused on deprescribed medications and potential methodological concerns. Only a third (4/12) of the trials aimed to study mortality, and that too as a secondary outcome. Five trials reported a reduction in total medications, potentially inappropriate medications or drug-related problems. Information on specific classes of deprescribed medications was limited, although a wide array was concerned (e.g., antihypertensive, sedative, gastro-intestinal medications and vitamins). Follow-up periods were ≤1 year in 11 trials, and five trials included ≤150 participants. Small sample sizes often resulted in imbalanced groups (e.g., comorbidities, number of potentially inappropriate medications), yet no trials presented multivariable analyses. In the two trials with the most weight in the meta-analysis, several deaths occurred before the intervention, making it difficult to draw conclusions about the impact of the deprescribing intervention on mortality. These methodological issues cast significant uncertainty on the benefits of deprescribing on mortality outcomes. Large-scale, well-designed trials are needed to address this issue effectively.