Older adults' adherence to medications and willingness to deprescribe: A substudy of a randomized clinical trial.

Our study investigated the association between patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed and medication adherence. This longitudinal substudy of the 'Optimizing PharmacoTherapy In the Multimorbid Elderly in Primary CAre' (OPTICA) trial, a cluster randomized controlled trial, took place in Swiss primary care settings. Participants were aged ≥65 years and over, with ≥3 chronic conditions and ≥5 regular medications. At baseline, the 'revised Patient Attitudes Towards Deprescribing' (rPATD) questionnaire was measured. The A14-scale measured adherence (self-report) at the 12-month follow-up. Multilevel linear regression analyses adjusted for baseline variables were performed. Of the 298 participants, 45% were women, and the median age was 78. Participants reported a high level of adherence and willingness to have medications deprescribed. We did not find evidence for an association between patients' willingness to deprescribe and medication adherence. Further research is needed to explore the relationship between these concepts and to inform collaborative decisions about medicines in the context of polypharmacy.

A mixed methods analysis of the medication review intervention centered around the use of the 'Systematic Tool to Reduce Inappropriate Prescribing' Assistant (STRIPA) in Swiss primary care practices.

BACKGROUND: Electronic clinical decision support systems (eCDSS), such as the 'Systematic Tool to Reduce Inappropriate Prescribing' Assistant (STRIPA), have become promising tools for assisting general practitioners (GPs) with conducting medication reviews in older adults. Little is known about how GPs perceive eCDSS-assisted recommendations for pharmacotherapy optimization. The aim of this study was to explore the implementation of a medication review intervention centered around STRIPA in the 'Optimising PharmacoTherapy In the multimorbid elderly in primary CAre' (OPTICA) trial. METHODS: We used an explanatory mixed methods design combining quantitative and qualitative data. First, quantitative data about the acceptance and implementation of eCDSS-generated recommendations from GPs (n = 21) and their patients (n = 160) in the OPTICA intervention group were collected. Then, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with GPs from the OPTICA intervention group (n = 8), and interview data were analyzed through thematic analysis. RESULTS: In quantitative findings, GPs reported averages of 13 min spent per patient preparing the eCDSS, 10 min performing medication reviews, and 5 min discussing prescribing recommendations with patients. On average, out of the mean generated 3.7 recommendations (SD=1.8). One recommendation to stop or start a medication was reported to be implemented per patient in the intervention group (SD=1.2). Overall, GPs found the STRIPA useful and acceptable. They particularly appreciated its ability to generate recommendations based on large amounts of patient information. During qualitative interviews, GPs reported the main reasons for limited implementation of STRIPA were related to problems with data sourcing (e.g., incomplete data imports), preparation of the eCDSS (e.g., time expenditure for updating and adapting information), its functionality (e.g., technical problems downloading PDF recommendation reports), and appropriateness of recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Qualitative findings help explain the relatively low implementation of recommendations demonstrated by quantitative findings, but also show GPs' overall acceptance of STRIPA. Our results provide crucial insights for adapting STRIPA to make it more suitable for regular use in future primary care settings (e.g., necessity to improve data imports). TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03724539, date of first registration: 29/10/2018.

Gender Differences in Perceived Working Conditions of General Practitioners During the COVID-19 Pandemic-a Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has revealed gender-specific differences between general practitioners in adapting to the posed challenges. As primary care workforce is becoming increasingly female, in many countries, it is essential to take a closer look at gender-specific influences when the global health care system is confronted with a crisis. OBJECTIVE: To explore gender-specific differences in the perceived working conditions and gender-specific differences in challenges facing GPs at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. DESIGN: Online survey in seven countries. PARTICIPANTS: 2,602 GPs from seven countries (Austria, Australia, Switzerland, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Slovenia). Of the respondents, 44.4% (n = 1,155) were women. MAIN MEASURES: Online survey. We focused on gender-specific differences in general practitioners' perceptions of working conditions at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. KEY RESULTS: Female GPs rated their skills and self-confidence significantly lower than male GPs (f: 7.1, 95%CI: 6.9-7.3 vs. m: 7.6, 95%CI 7.4-7.8; p < .001), and their perceived risk (concerned about becoming infected or infecting others) higher than men (f: 5.7, 95%CI: 5.4-6.0 vs. m: 5.1, 95%CI: 4.8-5.5; p = .011). Among female GPs, low self-confidence in the treatment of COVID-19 patients appear to be common. Results were similar in all of the participating countries. CONCLUSIONS: Female and male GPs differed in terms of their self-confidence when dealing with COVID-19-related issues and their perceptions of the risks arising from the pandemic. To ensure optimal medical care, it is important that GPs realistically assess their own abilities and overall risk.

Broken bones and apple brandy: resilience and sensemaking of general practitioners and their at-risk patients during the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland.

In early 2020, when the first COVID-19 cases were confirmed in Switzerland, the federal government started implementing measures such as national stay-at-home recommendations and a strict limitation of health care services use. General practitioners (GPs) and their at-risk patients faced similar uncertainties and grappled with subsequent sensemaking of the unprecedented situation. Qualitative interviews with 24 GPs and 37 at-risk patients were conducted which were analyzed using thematic analysis. Weick's (1993) four sources of -resilience - improvisation, virtual role systems, attitudes of wisdom and respectful interaction - heuristically guide the exploration of on-the-ground experiences and informal ways GPs and their at-risk patients sought to ensure continuity of primary care. GPs used their metaphorical Swiss army knives of learned tools as well as existing knowledge and relationships to adapt to the extenuating circumstances. Through improvisation, GPs and patients found pragmatic solutions, such as using local farmer apple brandy as disinfectant or at-home treatments of clavicle fractures. Through virtual role systems, GPs and patients came to terms with new and shifting roles, such as "good soldier" and "at-risk patient" categorizations. Both parties adopted attitudes of wisdom by accepting that they could not know everything. They also diversified their sources of information through personal relationships, formal networks, and the internet. The GP-patient relationship grew in importance through respectful interaction, and intersubjective reflection helped make sense of shifting roles and ambiguous guidelines. The empirical analysis of this paper contributes to theoretical considerations of sensemaking, resilience, crisis settings and health systems.

Do we AGREE on the targets of antihypertensive drug treatment in older adults: a systematic review of guidelines on primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases.

BACKGROUND: translation of the available evidence concerning primary cardiovascular prevention into clinical guidance for the heterogeneous population of older adults is challenging. With this review, we aimed to give an overview of the thresholds and targets of antihypertensive drug therapy for older adults in currently used guidelines on primary cardiovascular prevention. Secondly, we evaluated the relationship between the advised targets and guideline characteristics, including guideline quality. METHODS: we systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Emcare and five guideline databases. We selected guidelines with (i) numerical thresholds for the initiation or target values of antihypertensive drug therapy in context of primary prevention (January 2008-July 2020) and (ii) specific advice concerning antihypertensive drug therapy in older adults. We extracted the recommendations and appraised the quality of included guidelines with the AGREE II instrument. RESULTS: thirty-four guidelines provided recommendations concerning antihypertensive drug therapy in older adults. Twenty advised a higher target of systolic blood pressure (SBP) for octogenarians in comparison with the general population and three advised a lower target. Over half of the guidelines (n = 18) recommended to target a SBP <150 mmHg in the oldest old, while four endorsed targets of SBP lower than 130 or 120 mmHg. Although many guidelines acknowledged frailty, only three gave specific thresholds and targets. Guideline characteristics, including methodological quality, were not related with the recommended targets. CONCLUSION: the ongoing debate concerning targets of antihypertensive treatment in older adults, is reflected in an inconsistency of recommendations across guidelines. Recommended targets are largely set on chronological rather than biological age.

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

INTRODUCTION: To reduce inappropriate polypharmacy, deprescribing should be part of patients' regular care. Yet deprescribing is difficult to implement, as shown in several studies. Understanding patients' attitudes towards deprescribing at the individual and country level may reveal effective ways to involve older adults in decisions about medications and help to implement deprescribing in primary care settings. In this study we aim to investigate older adults' perceptions and views on deprescribing in different European countries. Specific objectives are to investigate the patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed by medication type and to have herbal or dietary supplements reduced or stopped, the role of the Patient Typology (on medication perspectives), and the impact of the patient-GP relationship in these decisions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This cross-sectional survey study has two parts: Part A and Part B. Data collection for Part A will take place in nine countries, in which per country 10 GPs will recruit 10 older patients (≥65 years old) each (n = 900). Part B will be conducted in Switzerland only, in which an additional 35 GPs will recruit five patients each and respond to a questionnaire themselves, with questions about the patients' medications, their willingness to deprescribe those, and their patient-provider relationship. For both Part A and part B, a questionnaire will be used to assess the willingness of older patients with polypharmacy to have medications deprescribed and other relevant information. For Part B, this same questionnaire will have additional questions on the use of herbal and dietary supplements. DISCUSSION: The international study design will allow comparisons of patient perspectives on deprescribing from different countries. We will collect information about willingness to have medications deprescribed by medication type and regarding herbal and dietary supplements, which adds important information to the literature on patients' preferences. In addition, GPs in Switzerland will also be surveyed, allowing us to compare GPs' and patients' views and preferences on stopping or reducing specific medications. Our findings will help to understand patients' attitudes towards deprescribing, contributing to improvements in the design and implementation of deprescribing interventions that are better tailored to patients' preferences.

Patient factors associated with new prescribing of potentially inappropriate medications in multimorbid US older adults using multiple medications.

BACKGROUND: The use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) is common in older adults and is associated with potential negative consequences, such as falls and cognitive decline. Our objective was to investigate measurable patient factors associated with new outpatient prescribing of potentially inappropriate medications in older multimorbid adults already using multiple medications. METHODS: In this retrospective US cohort study, we used linked Medicare pharmacy and medical claims and electronic health record data from a large healthcare system in Massachusetts between 2007 and 2014. We identified patients aged ≥65 years with an office visit who had not been prescribed or used a PIM in the prior 180 days. PIMs were defined using 2019 Beers criteria of the American Geriatrics Society. To specifically evaluate factors in patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity, we selected those who filled medications for ≥90 days (i.e., chronic use) from ≥5 pharmaceutical classes in the prior 180 days and had ≥2 chronic conditions. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to estimate the association between baseline demographic and clinical characteristics on the probability of being prescribed a PIM in the 90-day follow-up period. RESULTS: In total, we identified 17,912 patients aged ≥65 years with multimorbidity and polypharmacy who were naïve to a PIM in the prior 180 days. Of those, 10,497 (58.6%) were female, and mean age was 78 (SD = 7.5). On average, patients had 5.1 (SD = 2.3) chronic conditions and previously filled 6.1 (SD = 1.4) chronic medications. In total, 447 patients (2.5%) were prescribed a PIM during the 90-day follow-up. Male sex (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 1.29; 95%CI: 1.06-1.57), age (≥85 years: HR = 0.75, 95%CI: 0.56-0.99, 75-84 years: HR = 0.87, 95%CI: 0.71-1.07; reference: 65-74 years), ambulatory visits (18-29 visits: HR = 1.42, 95%CI: 1.06-1.92; ≥30 visits: HR = 2.12, 95%CI: 1.53-2.95; reference: ≤9 visits), number of prescribing orders (HR = 1.02, 95%CI: 1.01-1.02 per 1-unit increase), and heart failure (HR = 1.38, 95%CI: 1.07-1.78) were independently associated with being newly prescribed a PIM. CONCLUSION: Several demographic and clinical characteristics, including factors suggesting lack of care coordination and increased clinical complexity, were found to be associated with the new prescribing of potentially inappropriate medications. This knowledge could inform the design of interventions and policies to optimize pharmacotherapy for these patients.

General practitioners' deprescribing decisions in older adults with polypharmacy: a case vignette study in 31 countries.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) should regularly review patients' medications and, if necessary, deprescribe, as inappropriate polypharmacy may harm patients' health. However, deprescribing can be challenging for physicians. This study investigates GPs' deprescribing decisions in 31 countries. METHODS: In this case vignette study, GPs were invited to participate in an online survey containing three clinical cases of oldest-old multimorbid patients with potentially inappropriate polypharmacy. Patients differed in terms of dependency in activities of daily living (ADL) and were presented with and without history of cardiovascular disease (CVD). For each case, we asked GPs if they would deprescribe in their usual practice. We calculated proportions of GPs who reported they would deprescribe and performed a multilevel logistic regression to examine the association between history of CVD and level of dependency on GPs' deprescribing decisions. RESULTS: Of 3,175 invited GPs, 54% responded (N = 1,706). The mean age was 50 years and 60% of respondents were female. Despite differences across GP characteristics, such as age (with older GPs being more likely to take deprescribing decisions), and across countries, overall more than 80% of GPs reported they would deprescribe the dosage of at least one medication in oldest-old patients (> 80 years) with polypharmacy irrespective of history of CVD. The odds of deprescribing was higher in patients with a higher level of dependency in ADL (OR =1.5, 95%CI 1.25 to 1.80) and absence of CVD (OR =3.04, 95%CI 2.58 to 3.57). INTERPRETATION: The majority of GPs in this study were willing to deprescribe one or more medications in oldest-old multimorbid patients with polypharmacy. Willingness was higher in patients with increased dependency in ADL and lower in patients with CVD.

Baseline characteristics and comparability of older multimorbid patients with polypharmacy and general practitioners participating in a randomized controlled primary care trial.

OBJECTIVES: Recruiting general practitioners (GPs) and their multimorbid older patients for trials is challenging for multiple reasons (e.g., high workload, limited mobility). The comparability of study participants is important for interpreting study findings. This manuscript describes the baseline characteristics of GPs and patients participating in the 'Optimizing PharmacoTherapy in older multimorbid adults In primary CAre' (OPTICA) trial, a study of optimization of pharmacotherapy for multimorbid older adults. The overall aim of this study was to determine if the GPs and patients participating in the OPTICA trial are comparable to the real-world population in Swiss primary care. DESIGN: Analysis of baseline data from GPs and patients in the OPTICA trial and a reference cohort from the FIRE ('Family medicine ICPC Research using Electronic medical records') project. SETTING: Primary care, Switzerland. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred twenty-three multimorbid (≥ 3 chronic conditions) patients with polypharmacy (≥ 5 regular medications) aged ≥ 65 years and 43 GPs recruited for the OPTICA trial were compared to 22,907 older multimorbid patients with polypharmacy and 227 GPs from the FIRE database. METHODS: We compared the characteristics of GPs and patients participating in the OPTICA trial with other GPs and other older multimorbid adults with polypharmacy in the FIRE database. We described the baseline willingness to have medications deprescribed of the patients participating in the OPTICA trial using the revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire. RESULTS: The GPs in the FIRE project and OPTICA were similar in terms of sociodemographic characteristics and their work as a GP (e.g. aged in their fifties, ≥ 10 years of experience, ≥ 60% are self-employed, ≥ 80% work in a group practice). The median age of patients in the OPTICA trial was 77 years and 45% of trial participants were women. Patients participating in the OPTICA trial and patients in the FIRE database were comparable in terms of age, certain clinical characteristics (e.g. systolic blood pressure, body mass index) and health services use (e.g. selected lab and vital data measurements). More than 80% of older multimorbid patients reported to be willing to stop ≥ 1 of their medications if their doctor said that this would be possible. CONCLUSION: The characteristics of patients and GPs recruited into the OPTICA trial are relatively comparable to characteristics of a real-world Swiss population, which indicates that recruiting a generalizable patient sample is possible in the primary care setting. Multimorbid patients in the OPTICA trial reported a high willingness to have medications deprescribed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03724539 ), KOFAM (Swiss national portal) ( SNCTP000003060 ), Universal Trial Number (U1111-1226-8013).

Reorganisation of GP surgeries during the COVID-19 outbreak: analysis of guidelines from 15 countries.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) play a key role in managing the COVID-19 outbreak. However, they may encounter difficulties adapting their practices to the pandemic. We provide here an analysis of guidelines for the reorganisation of GP surgeries during the beginning of the pandemic from 15 countries. METHODS: A network of GPs collaborated together in a three-step process: (i) identification of key recommendations of GP surgery reorganisation, according to WHO, CDC and health professional resources from health care facilities; (ii) collection of key recommendations included in the guidelines published in 15 countries; (iii) analysis, comparison and synthesis of the results. RESULTS: Recommendations for the reorganisation of GP surgeries of four types were identified: (i) reorganisation of GP consultations (cancelation of non-urgent consultations, follow-up via e-consultations), (ii) reorganisation of GP surgeries (area partitioning, visual alerts and signs, strict hygiene measures), (iii) reorganisation of medical examinations by GPs (equipment, hygiene, partial clinical examinations, patient education), (iv) reorganisation of GP staff (equipment, management, meetings, collaboration with the local community). CONCLUSIONS: We provide here an analysis of guidelines for the reorganisation of GP surgeries during the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak from 15 countries. These guidelines focus principally on clinical care, with less attention paid to staff management, and the area of epidemiological surveillance and research is largely neglected. The differences of guidelines between countries and the difficulty to apply them in routine care, highlight the need of advanced research in primary care. Thereby, primary care would be able to provide recommendations adapted to the real-world settings and with stronger evidence, which is especially necessary during pandemics.

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

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity and polypharmacy are very common in older adults in primary care. Ideally, general practitioners (GPs), should regularly review medication lists to identify inappropriate medication(s) and, where appropriate, deprescribe. However, it remains challenging to deprescribe given time constraints and few recommendations from guidelines. Further, patient related barriers and enablers to deprescribing have to be accounted for. The aim of this study was to identify barriers and enablers to deprescribing as reported by older adults with polypharmacy and multimorbidity. METHODS: We conducted a survey among participants aged ≥70 years, with multimorbidity (≥3 chronic conditions) and polypharmacy (≥5 chronic medications). We invited Swiss GPs, to recruit eligible patients who then completed a paper-based survey on demographics, medications and chronic conditions. We used the revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire and added twelve additional Likert scale questions and two open-ended questions to assess barriers and enablers towards deprescribing, which we coded and categorized into meaningful themes. RESULT: Sixty four Swiss GPs consented to recruit 5-6 patients each and returned 300 participant responses. Participants were 79.1 years (SD 5.7), 47% female, 34% lived alone, and 86% managed their medications themselves. Sixty-seven percent of participants took 5-9 regular medicines and 24% took ≥10 medicines. The majority of participants (77%) were willing to deprescribe one or more of their medicines if their doctor said it was possible. There was no association with sex, age or the number of medicines and willingness to deprescribe. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, there was a strong positive association between willingness to deprescribe and saying that because they have a good relationship with their GP, they would feel that deprescribing was safe OR 11.3 (95% CI: 4.64-27.3) and agreeing that they would be willing to deprescribe if new studies showed an avoidable risk OR 8.0 (95% CI 3.79-16.9). From the open questions, the most mentioned barriers towards deprescribing were patients feeling well on their current medicines and being convinced that they need all their medicines. CONCLUSIONS: Most older adults with polypharmacy are willing to deprescribe. GPs may be able to increase deprescribing by building trust with their patients and communicating evidence about the risks of medication use.

A cross-sectional study of Swiss ambulatory care services use by multimorbid patients in primary care in the light of the Andersen model.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity is frequently encountered in primary care and is associated with increasing use of healthcare services. The Andersen Behavioral Model of Health Services Use is a multilevel framework classifying societal, contextual, and individual characteristics about the use of healthcare services into three categories: 1. predisposing factors, 2. enabling factors, and 3. need factors. The present study aimed to explore multimorbid patients' use of ambulatory healthcare in terms of homecare and other allied health services, visits to GPs, and number of specialists involved. A secondary aim was to apply Andersen's model to explore factors associated with this use. METHOD: In a cross-sectional study, 100 Swiss GPs enrolled up to 10 multimorbid patients each. After descriptive analyses, we tested the associations of each determinant and outcome variable of healthcare use, according to the Andersen model: predisposing factors (patient's demographics), enabling factors (health literacy (HLS-EU-Q6), deprivation (DipCare)), and need factors (patient's quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), treatment burden (TBQ), severity index (CIRS), number of chronic conditions, and of medications). Logistic regressions (dichotomous variables) and negative binomial regressions (count variables) were calculated to identify predictors of multimorbid patients' healthcare use. RESULTS: Analyses included 843 multimorbid patients; mean age 73.0 (SD 12.0), 28-98 years old; 48.3% men; 15.1% (127/843) used homecare. Social deprivation (OR 0.75, 95%CI 0.62-0.89) and absence of an informal caregiver (OR 0.50, 95%CI 0.28-0.88) were related to less homecare services use. The use of other allied health services (34.9% (294/843)) was associated with experiencing pain (OR 2.49, 95%CI 1.59-3.90). The number of contacts with a GP (median 11 (IQR 7-16)) was, among other factors, related to the absence of an informal caregiver (IRR 0.90, 95%CI 0.83-0.98). The number of specialists involved (mean 1.9 (SD 1.4)) was linked to the treatment burden (IRR 1.06, 95%CI 1.02-1.10). CONCLUSION: Multimorbid patients in primary care reported high use of ambulatory healthcare services variably associated with the Andersen model's factors: healthcare use was associated with objective medical needs but also with contextual or individual predisposing or enabling factors. These findings emphasize the importance of adapting care coordination to individual patient profiles.

Unburdening dementia - a basic social process grounded theory based on a primary care physician survey from 25 countries.

OBJECTIVE: To explore dementia management from a primary care physician perspective. DESIGN: One-page seven-item multiple choice questionnaire; free text space for every item; final narrative question of a dementia case story. Inductive explorative grounded theory analysis. Derived results in cluster analyses. Appropriateness of dementia drugs assessed by tertiary care specialist. SETTING: Twenty-five European General Practice Research Network member countries. SUBJECTS: Four hundred and forty-five key informant primary care physician respondents of which 106 presented 155 case stories. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Processes and typologies of dementia management. Proportion of case stories with drug treatment and treatment according to guidelines. RESULTS: Unburdening dementia - a basic social process - explained physicians' dementia management according to a grounded theory analysis using both qualitative and quantitative data. Unburdening starts with Recognizing the dementia burden by Burden Identification and Burden Assessment followed by Burden Relief. Drugs to relieve the dementia burden were reported for 130 of 155 patients; acetylcholinesterase inhibitors or memantine treatment in 89 of 155 patients - 60% appropriate according to guidelines and 40% outside of guidelines. More Central and Northern primary care physicians were allowed to prescribe, and more were engaged in dementia management than Eastern and Mediterranean physicians according to cluster analyses. Physicians typically identified and assessed the dementia burden and then tried to relieve it, commonly by drug prescriptions, but also by community health and home help services, mentioned in more than half of the case stories. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physician dementia management was explained by an Unburdening process with the goal to relieve the dementia burden, mainly by drugs often prescribed outside of guideline indications. Implications: Unique data about dementia management by European primary care physicians to inform appropriate stakeholders. Key points Dementia as a syndrome of cognitive and functional decline and behavioural and psychological symptoms causes a tremendous burden on patients, their families, and society. •We found that a basic social process of Unburdening dementia explained dementia management according to case stories and survey comments from primary care physicians in 25 countries. •First, Burden Recognition by Identification and Assessment and then Burden Relief - often by drugs. •Prescribing physicians repeatedly broadened guideline indications for dementia drugs. The more physicians were allowed to prescribe dementia drugs, the more they were responsible for the dementia work-up. Our study provides unique data about dementia management in European primary care for the benefit of national and international stakeholders.

Does a home-based interview with a chronically ill patient help medical students become more patient-centred? A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: While patient-centred care improves patient outcomes, studies have shown that medical students become less patient-centred with time, so it is crucial to devise interventions that prevent this. We sought to determine whether first-year medical students who had a structured home-based interview with a chronically ill patient became more patient-centred than those who had a sham intervention. METHODS: This randomised controlled trial assigned first-year students from the University of Bern, Switzerland, to either an interview with a chronically ill patient at the patient's home or to a sham comparator. We used the PPOS-D12 questionnaire to measure students' levels of patient-centredness at baseline, and changes in these levels during their longitudinal primary care clerkship. RESULTS: A total of 317 students participated. Patient-centred attitudes increased during the study. A home-based interview with a chronically ill patient had no additional effect. Being female and having been exposed to patients before medical school were associated with being more patient-centred at baseline. Students were less patient-centred than their General Practitioner teachers. CONCLUSIONS: A structured, home-based interview with a chronically ill patient did not change students' patient-centred attitudes, so cannot be recommended as a way to influence those attitudes. However, patient-centred attitudes increased during the students' first year of study, possibly because of their longitudinal primary care clerkship. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov reference: NCT03722810 , registered 29th October 2018.

Patient Characteristics and General Practitioners' Advice to Stop Statins in Oldest-Old Patients: a Survey Study Across 30 Countries.

BACKGROUND: Statins are widely used to prevent cardiovascular disease (CVD). With advancing age, the risks of statins might outweigh the potential benefits. It is unclear which factors influence general practitioners' (GPs) advice to stop statins in oldest-old patients. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of a history of CVD, statin-related side effects, frailty and short life expectancy, on GPs' advice to stop statins in oldest-old patients. DESIGN: We invited GPs to participate in this case-based survey. GPs were presented with 8 case vignettes describing patients > 80 years using a statin, and asked whether they would advise stopping statin treatment. MAIN MEASURES: Cases varied in history of CVD, statin-related side effects and frailty, with and without shortened life expectancy (< 1 year) in the context of metastatic, non-curable cancer. Odds ratios adjusted for GP characteristics (ORadj) were calculated for GPs' advice to stop. KEY RESULTS: Two thousand two hundred fifty GPs from 30 countries participated (median response rate 36%). Overall, GPs advised stopping statin treatment in 46% (95%CI 45-47) of the case vignettes; with shortened life expectancy, this proportion increased to 90% (95CI% 89-90). Advice to stop was more frequent in case vignettes without CVD compared to those with CVD (ORadj 13.8, 95%CI 12.6-15.1), with side effects compared to without ORadj 1.62 (95%CI 1.5-1.7) and with frailty (ORadj 4.1, 95%CI 3.8-4.4) compared to without. Shortened life expectancy increased advice to stop (ORadj 50.7, 95%CI 45.5-56.4) and was the strongest predictor for GP advice to stop, ranging across countries from 30% (95%CI 19-42) to 98% (95% CI 96-99). CONCLUSIONS: The absence of CVD, the presence of statin-related side effects, and frailty were all independently associated with GPs' advice to stop statins in patients aged > 80 years. Overall, and within all countries, cancer-related short life expectancy was the strongest independent predictor of GPs' advice to stop statins.

Systolic Blood Pressure and Cognitive Decline in Older Adults With Hypertension.

PURPOSE: Hypertension trials often exclude patients with complex health problems and lack generalizability. We aimed to determine if systolic blood pressure (SBP) in patients undergoing antihypertensive treatment is associated with 1-year changes in cognitive/daily functioning or quality of life (QoL) in persons aged ≥75 years with or without complex health problems. METHODS: We analyzed data from a population-based prospective cohort study (Integrated Systematic Care for Older Persons [ISCOPE]) with a 1-year follow-up. Stratified by SBP level in the year before baseline, we used mixed-effects linear regression models to evaluate the change from baseline to 1-year follow-up in outcome measures (Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE], Groningen Activity Restriction Scale [GARS], and EQ-5D-3L). We adjusted for age, sex, and baseline MMSE/GARS/EQ-5D-3L scores and stratified for complex health problems as a proxy for frailty. RESULTS: Participant (n = 1,266) age averaged 82.4 (SD 5) years, and 874 (69%) were women. For participants undergoing antihypertensive therapy (1,057; 83.5%) and with SBP <130 mm Hg, crude cognitive decline was 0.90 points MMSE, whereas in those with SBP >150 mm Hg, it was 0.14 points MMSE (ie, 0.76-point less decline; P for trend = .013). Complex health problems modified the association of SBP with cognition; the association was seen in those with antihypertensive treatment (P for trend <.001), not in those without (P for trend = .13). Daily functioning/QoL did not differ across the strata of SBP or antihypertensive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Participants aged ≥75 years undergoing antihypertensive treatment, with SBP ≥130 mm Hg compared to <130 mm Hg, showed less cognitive decline after 1 year, without loss of daily functioning or QoL. This effect was strongest in participants with complex health problems. More studies should be conducted to determine if there is a causal relation and to understand the mechanism of the association observed.

Barriers and enablers for deprescribing among older, multimorbid patients with polypharmacy: an explorative study from Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is an increasing problem, leading to increased morbidity and mortality, especially in older, multimorbid patients. Consequently, there is a need for reduction of polypharmacy. The aim of this study was to explore attitudes, beliefs, and concerns towards deprescribing among older, multimorbid patients with polypharmacy who chose not to pursue at least one of their GP's offers to deprescribe. METHODS: Exploratory study using telephone interviews among patients of a cluster-randomized study in Northern Switzerland. The interview included a qualitative part consisting of questions in five pre-defined key areas of attitudes, beliefs, and concerns about deprescribing and an open explorative question. The quantitative part consisted of a rating of pre-defined statements in these areas. RESULTS: Twenty-two of 87 older, multimorbid patients with polypharmacy, to whom their GP offered a drug change, did not pursue all offers. Nineteen of these 22 were interviewed by telephone. The 19 patients were on average 76.9 (SD 10.0) years old, 74% female, and took 8.9 (SD 2.6) drugs per day. Drugs for acid-related disorders, analgesics and anti-inflammatory drugs were the three most common drug groups where patient involvement and the shared-decision-making (SDM) process led to the joint decision to not pursue the GPs offer. Eighteen of 19 patients fully trusted their GP, 17 of 19 participated in SDM even before this study and 8 of 19 perceived polypharmacy as a substantial burden. Conservatism/inertia and fragmented medical care were the main barriers towards deprescribing. No patient felt devalued as a consequence of the deprescribing offer. Our exploratory findings were supported by patients' ratings of predefined statements. CONCLUSION: We identified patient involvement in deprescribing and coordination of care as key issues for deprescribing among older multimorbid patients with polypharmacy. GPs concerns regarding patients' devaluation should not prevent them from actively discussing the reduction of drugs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN16560559 .

General practitioners' attitudes towards early diagnosis of dementia: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Dementia is often underdiagnosed in general practice, which may be based on general practitioners' (GPs') knowledge and emotional factors as well as external problems. This study aimed to describe GPs' attitudes toward early diagnosis of dementia. METHODS: Cross-sectional postal survey in Switzerland in 2017. Members of the Swiss Association of General Practitioners (N = 4460) were asked to participate in the survey. The questionnaire assessed attitudes, enablers and barriers to early dementia diagnosis and post-diagnostic intervention strategies. Exploratory factor analysis and linear regression were used. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 21%. 85% of GPs agreed with enablers of early dementia recognition (e.g. "Plan for the future, organize support and care", "Minimize the strain and insecurity of patients and their informal family caregivers"). On the other hand, 15% of respondents perceived barriers towards early dementia recognition (e.g. "Time constraints in carrying out the necessary procedures to diagnose dementia"). GPs who were more likely to agree with barriers would less often counsel family members (ß = - 0.05, 95% CI = - 0.09 - -0.02) or test fitness to drive (ß = - 0.05, 95% CI = - 0.09 - -0.02), and more often choose a watchful waiting strategy (ß = 0.05, 95% CI = 0.02-0.09). CONCLUSIONS: The attitude of the majority of GPs is not characterized by diagnostic and therapeutic nihilism. However, negative attitudes were associated with sub-optimal management after the diagnosis. Thus, health systems are required to critically examine the use of available resources allowing GPs to look after patients and their relatives in a holistic way.

Factors associated with patients' and GPs' assessment of the burden of treatment in multimorbid patients: a cross-sectional study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbid patients may experience a high burden of treatment. This has a negative impact on treatment adherence, health outcomes and health care costs. The objective of our study was to identify factors associated with the self-perceived burden of treatment of multimorbid patients in primary care and to compare them with factors associated with GPs assessment of this burden. METHOD: A cross sectional study in general practices, 100 GPs in Switzerland and up to 10 multimorbid patients per GP. Patients reported their self-perceived burden of treatment using the Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ, possible score 0-150), whereas GPs evaluated the burden of treatment on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) from 1 to 9. The study explored medical, social and psychological factors associated with burden of treatment, such as number and type of chronic conditions and drugs, severity of chronic conditions (CIRS score), age, quality of life, deprivation, health literacy. RESULTS: The GPs included 888 multimorbid patients. The overall median TBQ was 20 and the median VAS was 4. Both patients' and GPs' assessment of the burden of treatment were inversely associated with patients' age and quality of life. In addition, patients' assessment of their burden of treatment was associated with a higher deprivation score and lower health literacy, and with having diabetes or atrial fibrillation, whereas GPs' assessment of this burden was associated with the patient having a greater number of chronic conditions and drugs, and a higher CIRS score. CONCLUSION: Both from patients' and GPs' perspectives TB appears to be higher in younger patients. Whereas for patients the burden of treatment is associated with socio-economic and psychological factors, GPs' assessments of this burden are associated with medical factors. Including socio-economic and psychological factors on patients' self-perception is likely to improve GPs' assessments of their patients' burden of treatment thus favoring patient-centered care.