Reducing potentially inappropriate polypharmacy at a national and international level: the impact of deprescribing networks.

INTRODUCTION: Over the past decade, polypharmacy has increased dramatically. Measurable harms include falls, fractures, cognitive impairment, and death. The associated costs are massive and contribute substantially to low-value health care. Deprescribing is a promising solution, but there are barriers. Establishing a network to address polypharmacy can help overcome barriers by connecting individuals with an interest and expertise in deprescribing and can act as an important source of motivation and resources. AREAS COVERED: Over the past decade, several deprescribing networks were launched to help tackle polypharmacy, with evidence of individual and collective impact. A network approach has several advantages; it can spark interest, ideas and enthusiasm through information sharing, meetings and conversations with the public, providers, and other key stakeholders. In this special report, the details of how four deprescribing networks were established across the globe are detailed. EXPERT OPINION: Networks create links between people who lead existing and/or budding deprescribing practices and policy initiatives, can influence people with a shared passion for deprescribing, and facilitate sharing of intellectual capital and tools to take initiatives further and strengthen impact.This report should inspire others to establish their own deprescribing networks, a critical step in accelerating a global deprescribing movement.

A mixed-methods study on the pharmacological management of pain in Australian and Japanese nursing homes.

BACKGROUND: Understanding how analgesics are used in different countries can inform initiatives to improve the pharmacological management of pain in nursing homes. AIMS: To compare patterns of analgesic use among Australian and Japanese nursing home residents; and explore Australian and Japanese healthcare professionals' perspectives on analgesic use. METHODS: Part one involved a cross-sectional comparison among residents from 12 nursing homes in South Australia (N = 550) in 2019 and four nursing homes in Tokyo (N = 333) in 2020. Part two involved three focus groups with Australian and Japanese healthcare professionals (N = 16) in 2023. Qualitative data were deductively content analysed using the World Health Organization six-step Guide to Good Prescribing. RESULTS: Australian and Japanese residents were similar in age (median: 89 vs 87) and sex (female: 73% vs 73%). Overall, 74% of Australian and 11% of Japanese residents used regular oral acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or opioids. Australian and Japanese healthcare professionals described individualising pain management and the first-line use of acetaminophen. Australian participants described their therapeutic goal was to alleviate pain and reported analgesics were often prescribed on a regular basis. Japanese participants described their therapeutic goal was to minimise impacts of pain on daily activities and reported analgesics were often prescribed for short-term durations, corresponding to episodes of pain. Japanese participants described regulations that limit opioid use for non-cancer pain in nursing homes. CONCLUSION: Analgesic use is more prevalent in Australian than Japanese nursing homes. Differences in therapeutic goals, culture, analgesic regulations and treatment durations may contribute to this apparent difference.

Revisiting systematic reviews on deprescribing trials to better inform future practice and research.

Deprescribing aims to address the problem of medication overuse in older adults. There has been an increasing number of systematic reviews of 'deprescribing'. We aimed to describe the categories of trials included in recent systematic reviews, and to make recommendations for future research. We categorized 122 trials included in eight recent deprescribing systematic reviews into: discontinuation, deprescribing implementation, medication optimisation (including medication initiation) and non-initiation trials. We identified heterogeneity and inconsistency in the categories of trials included in deprescribing systematic reviews. For example, 39 trials (32.0%) involved medication initiation in addition to the deprescribing component. It is now time for international researchers to develop and validate terminology used for trials involving discontinuation/deprescribing of medications, and to provide recommendations for evidence synthesis that will better inform future research, and translation into practice and policy.

Clinical practice guideline for deprescribing opioid analgesics: summary of recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: Long term opioids are commonly prescribed to manage pain. Dose reduction or discontinuation (deprescribing) can be challenging, even when the potential harms of continuation outweigh the perceived benefits. The Evidence-based clinical practice guideline for deprescribing opioid analgesics was developed using robust guideline development processes and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, and contains deprescribing recommendations for adults prescribed opioids for pain. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: Eleven recommendations provide advice about when, how and for whom opioid deprescribing should be considered, while noting the need to consider each person's goals, values and preferences. The recommendations aim to achieve: implementation of a deprescribing plan at the point of opioid initiation; initiation of opioid deprescribing for persons with chronic non-cancer or chronic cancer-survivor pain if there is a lack of overall and clinically meaningful improvement in function, quality of life or pain, a lack of progress towards meeting agreed therapeutic goals, or the person is experiencing serious or intolerable opioid-related adverse effects; gradual and individualised deprescribing, with regular monitoring and review; consideration of opioid deprescribing for individuals at high risk of opioid-related harms; avoidance of opioid deprescribing for persons nearing the end of life unless clinically indicated; avoidance of opioid deprescribing for persons with a severe opioid use disorder, with the initiation of evidence-based care, such as medication-assisted treatment of opioid use disorder; and use of evidence-based co-interventions to facilitate deprescribing, including interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary or multimodal care. CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THESE GUIDELINES: To our knowledge, these are the first evidence-based guidelines for opioid deprescribing. The recommendations intend to facilitate safe and effective deprescribing to improve the quality of care for persons taking opioids for pain.

Willingness of older people living with dementia and mild cognitive impairment and their caregivers to have medications deprescribed.

BACKGROUND: people living with cognitive impairment commonly take multiple medications including potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), which puts them at risk of medication related harms. AIMS: to explore willingness to have a medication deprescribed of older people living with cognitive impairment (dementia or mild cognitive impairment) and multiple chronic conditions and assess the relationship between willingness, patient characteristics and belief about medications. METHODS: cross-sectional study using results from the revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing questionnaire (rPATDcog) collected as baseline data in the OPTIMIZE study, a pragmatic, cluster-randomised trial educating patients and clinicians about deprescribing. Eligible participants were 65+, diagnosed with dementia or mild cognitive impairment, and prescribed at least five-long-term medications. RESULTS: the questionnaire was mailed to 1,409 intervention patients and 553 (39%) were returned and included in analysis. Participants had a mean age of 80.1 (SD 7.4) and 52.4% were female. About 78.5% (431/549) of participants said that they would be willing to have one of their medications stopped if their doctor said it was possible. Willingness to deprescribe was negatively associated with getting stressed when changes are made and with previously having a bad experience with stopping a medication (P < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSION: most older people living with cognitive impairment are willing to deprescribe. Addressing previous bad experiences with stopping a medication and stress when changes are made to medications may be key points to discuss during deprescribing conversations.

Intervention design in cognitively impaired populations-Lessons learned from the OPTIMIZE deprescribing pragmatic trial.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is common in older adults with cognitive impairment and multiple chronic conditions, increasing risks of adverse drug events, hospitalization, and death. Deprescribing, the process of reducing or stopping potentially inappropriate medications, may improve outcomes. The OPTIMIZE pragmatic trial examined whether educating and activating patients, family members and clinicians about deprescribing reduces number of chronic medications and potentially inappropriate medications. Acceptability and challenges of intervention delivery in cognitively impaired older adults are not well understood. METHODS: We explored mechanisms of intervention implementation through post hoc qualitative interviews and surveys with stakeholder groups of 15 patients, 7 caregivers, and 28 clinicians. We assessed the context in which the intervention was delivered, its implementation, and mechanisms of impact. RESULTS: Acceptance of the intervention was affected by contextual factors including cognition, prior knowledge of deprescribing, communication, and time constraints. All stakeholder groups endorsed the acceptability, importance, and delivery of the intervention. Positive mechanisms of impact included patients scheduling specific appointments to discuss deprescribing and providers being prompted to consider deprescribing. Recollection of intervention materials was inconsistent but most likely shortly after intervention delivery. Short visit times remained the largest provider barrier to deprescribing. CONCLUSIONS: Our work identifies key learnings in intervention delivery that can guide future scaling of deprescribing interventions in this population. We highlight the critical roles of timing and repetition in intervention delivery to cognitively impaired populations and the barrier posed by short consultation times. The acceptability of the intervention to patients and family members highlights the potential to incorporate deprescribing education into routine clinical practice and expand proven interventions to other vulnerable populations.

Consumer and Healthcare Professional Led Priority Setting for Quality Use of Medicines in People with Dementia: Gathering Unanswered Research Questions.

BACKGROUND: Historically, research questions have been posed by the pharmaceutical industry or researchers, with little involvement of consumers and healthcare professionals. OBJECTIVE: To determine what questions about medicine use are important to people living with dementia and their care team and whether they have been previously answered by research. METHODS: The James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership process was followed. A national Australian qualitative survey on medicine use in people living with dementia was conducted with consumers (people living with dementia and their carers including family, and friends) and healthcare professionals. Survey findings were supplemented with key informant interviews and relevant published documents (identified by the research team). Conventional content analysis was used to generate summary questions. Finally, evidence checking was conducted to determine if the summary questions were 'unanswered'. RESULTS: A total of 545 questions were submitted by 228 survey participants (151 consumers and 77 healthcare professionals). Eight interviews were conducted with key informants and four relevant published documents were identified and reviewed. Overall, analysis resulted in 68 research questions, grouped into 13 themes. Themes with the greatest number of questions were related to co-morbidities, adverse drug reactions, treatment of dementia, and polypharmacy. Evidence checking resulted in 67 unanswered questions. CONCLUSION: A wide variety of unanswered research questions were identified. Addressing unanswered research questions identified by consumers and healthcare professionals through this process will ensure that areas of priority are targeted in future research to achieve optimal health outcomes through quality use of medicines.

Deprescribing: Moving beyond barriers and facilitators.

Unnecessary polypharmacy continues to be a problem among older adults. The field of deprescribing (planned, supervised process of medication discontinuation) aims to address this problem. Deprescribing is a relatively new field despite having grown substantially in recent years. Much of the early research in this area focused on identifying barriers to and facilitators of deprescribing in clinical practice, which contributed to a large body of work on this topic. However, with continuing research around barriers and facilitators, we need to be mindful to undertake research that builds on existing knowledge, addresses known gaps, and advances the field. Additionally, there is a need in deprescribing research to shift focus to developing ways to address known barriers and harness knowledge of facilitators. That is, translating existing knowledge into strategies and tools that can impact clinical practice and lead to practical and sustained deprescribing efforts.

Development, validation and evaluation of the Goal-directed Medication review Electronic Decision Support System (G-MEDSS)©.

OBJECTIVES: 1) To understand and investigate the experiences of accredited clinical pharmacists (ACP) using computerised clinical decision support systems (CCDSS) during medication reviews for older people, including those living with dementia; 2) To design, develop, validate, and evaluate a CCDSS that incorporates pharmacological and other deprescribing tools to aid person-centred management of high-risk medications in older adults living with and without dementia. METHODS: This study consisted of three phases and was designed on scenario-based methodology: a) the development phase, which included an exploratory survey and prototype building; b) the validation phase, which included qualitative data collection and usability testing with ACPs, general practitioners (GPs) and carers for people living with dementia; and c) the evaluation phase, using mixed-methods analyses. RESULTS: The exploratory survey found that ACPs required a flexible, and reliable CCDSS to support them with clinical decisions regarding high-risk medication use in older adults. The Goal-directed Medication review Electronic Decision Support System (G-MEDSS)© was developed and validated using quantitative and qualitative feedback received from ACPs, GPs and carers for people with dementia. The mean (SD) System Usability Scale score was 69.0 (12.9), which indicated fair-good usability. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Involving end-users in the design process refined and improved the design of G-MEDSS, allowing for a person-centred and goal-directed delivery of pharmaceutical care. G-MEDSS allows healthcare practitioners conducting medication reviews for older adults living with and without dementia to tailor pharmaceutical care to meet their goals and preferences. Future studies may explore integration of G-MEDSS with prescribing or dispensing software.

Consumer Attitudes Towards Deprescribing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Harmful and/or unnecessary medication use in older adults is common. This indicates deprescribing (supervised withdrawal of inappropriate medicines) is not happening as often as it should. This study aimed to synthesize the results of the Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (PATD) questionnaire (and revised versions). METHODS: Databases were searched from January 2013 to March 2020. Google Scholar was used for citation searching of the development and validation manuscripts to identify original research using the validated PATD, revised PATD (older adult and caregiver versions), and the version for people with cognitive impairment (rPATDcog). Two authors extracted data independently. A meta-analysis of proportions (random-effects model) was conducted with subgroup meta-analyses for setting and population. The primary outcome was the question: "If my doctor said it was possible, I would be willing to stop one or more of my medicines." Secondary outcomes were associations between participant characteristics and primary outcome and other (r)PATD results. RESULTS: We included 46 articles describing 40 studies (n = 10,816 participants). The meta-analysis found the proportion of participants who agreed or strongly agreed with this statement was 84% (95% CI 81%-88%) and 80% (95% CI 74%-86%) in patients and caregivers, respectively, with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 95% and 77%). CONCLUSION: Consumers reported willingness to have a medication deprescribed although results should be interpreted with caution due to heterogeneity. The findings from this study moves toward understanding attitudes toward deprescribing, which could increase the discussion and uptake of deprescribing recommendations in clinical practice.

Using the behavior change wheel to link published deprescribing strategies to identified local primary healthcare needs.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is a major global problem. Evidence in primary care shows deprescribing can be beneficial. Behaviour change theories such as the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) can help develop successful implementation of deprescribing initiatives. OBJECTIVES: To link locally identified deprescribing influencers with components of successfully trialed deprescribing strategies, with the aim of informing the development of local deprescribing initiatives. METHODS: Two background studies were completed. A qualitative study of interviews and focus groups identified influencers of deprescribing from local primary care physicians, nurse practitioners, and pharmacists. Transcripts were coded using the TDF and mapped to the Intervention Functions of the BCW. A scoping review identified studies that investigated primary care deprescribing strategies, which were mapped to the BCW Intervention Functions and the Behaviour Change Techniques (BCTs). For this analysis, six main TDF domains from the qualitative study were linked to the BCTs identified in the scoping review through the Intervention Functions of the BCW. RESULTS: Within the BCW component Capability, one TDF domain identified in the qualitative study, Memory, Attention and Decision Process, was linked to strategies like academic detailing from the scoping review. For the Opportunity component, two TDF domains, Social Influences and Environmental Context and Resources, were linked to strategies such as pharmacist medication reviews, providing patient information leaflets, and evidence-based deprescribing tools. For the Motivation component, three TDF domains, Social/Professional Role and Identity, Intentions, and Beliefs about Consequences, were linked to strategies such as sending deprescribing information to prescribers, using tools to identify eligible patients, and having patients report adverse events of medications. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis identified deprescribing strategies that can be used to address influencers related to behaviour change from the perspective of primary care providers, and to assist with future deprescribing initiative development and implementation in the local context.

Attitudes to Drug Use in Residential Aged Care Facilities: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Nurses and Care Staff.

BACKGROUND: Residential aged care facility (RACF) staff are well placed to identify opportunities for more appropriate prescribing. However, little is known about their views of polypharmacy, deprescribing and specific medications. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to establish the beliefs and attitudes of RACF staff towards polypharmacy and medication use in residents. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted on RACF staff in metropolitan New South Wales, Australia using a self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire was drafted based on the available literature and research team expertise and then piloted by a mixed group of 13 RACF staff. The final version of the questionnaire consisted of 28 questions. A total of 38 RACFs were contacted about the study. The questionnaire was distributed to eligible RACF staff between October 2017 and October 2019. The RACF staff were eligible if they provided direct patient care to residents or worked as a facility manager. Participants were excluded if they had insufficient English language skills. The results were presented in two groups, the nursing and care staff, using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 176 individuals from nine RACFs completed the questionnaire of whom 160 were eligible for study inclusion. Most considered polypharmacy to be five or more different tablets and capsules per day (95% nursing and 82% care staff respectively). A wide range of beliefs about medication use and deprescribing that centred on what constitutes appropriate polypharmacy was identified. Most thought that preventive medications were essential for residents. Most nurses agreed that sleeping tablets and pharmacological management of verbal aggression and wandering behaviours should be used less frequently whilst most care staff agreed that medications should be used more frequently to manage physical aggression. CONCLUSIONS: To successfully and sustainably optimise medication use in RACF residents, it is important to consider the variation in views of nurses and care staff.

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).

Development and dissemination of the national strategic action plan for reducing inappropriate polypharmacy in older Australians.

A cohesive, national approach is needed to address inappropriate polypharmacy in older adults and promote deprescribing. We describe the dissemination of the Quality Use of Medicines to Optimise Ageing in Older Australians: Recommendations for a National Strategic Action Plan to Reduce Inappropriate Polypharmacy, and the initiatives taken to date that align with, and assist in operationalising this plan.

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.

Patients' and Caregivers' Attitudes Toward Deprescribing in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of decision-making preference of patients and caregivers is needed to facilitate deprescribing. This study aimed to assess the perspectives of caregivers and older adults towards deprescribing in an Asian population. Secondary objectives were to identify and compare characteristics associated with these attitudes and beliefs. METHOD: A cross-sectional survey of two groups of participants was conducted using the Revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing questionnaire. Descriptive results were reported for participants' characteristics and questionnaire responses from four factors (belief in medication inappropriateness, medication burden, concerns about stopping, and involvement) and two global questions. Correlation between participant characteristics and their responses was analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 1,057 (615 older adults; 442 caregivers) participants were recruited from 10 institutions in Singapore. In which 511 (83.0%) older adults and 385 (87.1%) caregivers reported that they would be willing to stop one or more of their medications if their doctor said it was possible, especially among older adults recruited from acute-care hospitals (85.3%) compared with older adults in community pharmacies (73.6%). Individuals who take more than five medications and those with higher education were correlated with greater agreement in inappropriateness and involvement, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should consider discussing deprescribing with older adults and caregivers in their regular clinical practice, especially when polypharmacy is present. Further research is needed into how to engage older adults and caregivers in shared decision making based on their attitudes toward deprescribing.