Strategies for Identifying Patients for Deprescribing of Blood Pressure Medications in Routine Practice: An Evidence Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarise the evidence regarding which patients might benefit from deprescribing antihypertensive medications. RECENT FINDINGS: Older patients with frailty, multi-morbidity and subsequent polypharmacy are at higher risk of adverse events from antihypertensive treatment, and therefore may benefit from antihypertensive deprescribing. It is possible to examine an individual's risk of these adverse events, and use this to identify those people where the benefits of treatment may be outweighed by the harms. While such patients might be considered for deprescribing, the long-term effects of this treatment strategy remain unclear. Evidence now exists to support identification of those who are at risk of adverse events from antihypertensive treatment. These patients could be targeted for deprescribing interventions, although the long-term benefits and harms of this approach are unclear. PERSPECTIVES: Randomised controlled trials are still needed to examine the long-term effects of deprescribing in high-risk patients with frailty and multi-morbidity.

The Carer Assessment of MedicaTion Management GuidanCe for People With Dementia at Hospital Discharge (CATCH) Tool: Exploratory Factor Analysis.

PURPOSE: The Carer Assessment of medicaTion management guidanCe for people with dementia at Hospital discharge (CATCH) tool was developed to examine the carer's experiences of medication management guidance delivery at discharge. This study explored its factor structure, characterized carers' experiences at discharge, and identified predictors of carer preparedness to manage medications at discharge. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of carers across Australia was distributed. Survey responses were analyzed descriptively, and exploratory factor and regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 185 survey responses were completed. Exploratory factor analysis revealed 2 factors in the CATCH tool: (1) shared and supported decision-making in medication management (16 items loading 0.47 to 0.93); 2) provision of medication management guidance that is easy to understand (4 items loading (0.48 to 0.82). Internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach alpha >0.8). Almost 18% of participants stated that they were not included in decisions about medications for people with dementia. The carer reported that the measure of how guidance is provided was positively related to their confidence in the management of medications postdischarge and satisfaction ( P < 0.05 for both). CONCLUSIONS: The CATCH tool can give the patient and carer an opportunity to provide feedback on key elements of medication management guidance delivered at discharge.

Deprescribing antihypertensive drugs in frail older adults.

Antihypertensive drugs are commonly used by older adults because of the high prevalence of cardiovascular disease and its risk factors, and the increased absolute benefit of blood pressure reduction with increasing age. Clinical trials of blood pressure reduction in older adults have generally excluded older adults with multimorbidity, frailty and limited life expectancy. In this population, the benefit-harm ratio of aggressive blood pressure lowering may become unfavourable; a more relaxed blood pressure target may be appropriate; and deprescribing (cessation or dose reduction) of one or more antihypertensive drugs can be considered. Before deprescribing an antihypertensive drug, it is important to consider other indications for which it may have been prescribed (e.g. heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, diabetic nephropathy, atrial fibrillation). Evidence from randomised controlled deprescribing trials indicates that it is possible to deprescribe antihypertensives in frail older people. However, some patients may experience an increase in blood pressure that warrants restarting the drug. There are limited data on long-term outcomes (follow-up in deprescribing trials ranged from 4 to 56 weeks). The risk of adverse outcomes associated with deprescribing, such as withdrawal effects, can be minimised through appropriate planning, patient engagement, dose tapering and monitoring.

Transforming blood pressure control in primary care through a novel remote decision support strategy based on wearable blood pressure monitoring: The NEXTGEN-BP randomized trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Despite high blood pressure being the leading preventable risk factor for death, only 1 in 3 patients achieve target blood pressure control. Key contributors to this problem are clinical inertia and uncertainties in relying on clinic blood pressure measurements to make treatment decisions. METHODS: The NEXTGEN-BP open-label, multicenter, randomized controlled trial will investigate the efficacy, safety, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of a wearable blood pressure monitor-based care strategy for the treatment of hypertension, compared to usual care, in lowering clinic blood pressure over 12 months. NEXTGEN-BP will enroll 600 adults with high blood pressure, treated with 0 to 2 antihypertensive medications. Participants attending primary care practices in Australia will be randomized 1:1 to the intervention of a wearable-based remote care strategy or to usual care. Participants in the intervention arm will undergo continuous blood pressure monitoring using a wrist-wearable cuffless device (Aktiia, Switzerland) and participate in 2 telehealth consultations with their primary care practitioner (general practitioner [GP]) at months 1 and 2. Antihypertensive medication will be up-titrated by the primary care practitioner at the time of telehealth consults should the percentage of daytime blood pressure at target over the past week be <90%, if clinically tolerated. Participants in the usual care arm will have primary care consultations according to usual practice. The primary outcome is the difference between intervention and control in change in clinic systolic blood pressure from baseline to 12 months. Secondary outcomes will be assessed at month 3 and month 12, and include acceptability to patients and practitioners, cost-effectiveness, safety, medication adherence and patient engagement. CONCLUSIONS: NEXTGEN-BP will provide evidence for the effectiveness and safety of a new paradigm of wearable cuffless monitoring in the management of high blood pressure in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12622001583730.

Deprescribing interventions for gabapentinoids in adults: A scoping review.

The emerging issue of rising gabapentinoid misuse is being recognized alongside the lack of current evidence supporting the safe and effective deprescribing of gabapentinoids. This scoping review aimed to assess the extent and nature of gabapentinoid deprescribing interventions in adults, either in reducing dosages, or prescribing of, gabapentinoids. Electronic databases were searched on 23 February 2022 without restrictions. Eligible studies included randomized, non-randomized and observational studies that assessed an intervention aimed at reducing/ceasing the prescription/use of a gabapentinoid in adults for any indication in a clinical setting. The research outcomes investigated the type of intervention, prescribing rates, cessations, patient outcomes and adverse events. Extracted outcome data were categorized as either short (≤3 months), intermediate (>3 but <12 months) or long (≥12 months) term. A narrative synthesis was conducted. The four included studies were conducted in primary and acute care settings. Interventions were of dose-reducing protocols, education and/or pharmacological-based approaches. In the randomized trials, gabapentinoid use could be ceased in at least one third of participants. In the two observational trials, gabapentinoid prescribing rates decreased by 9%. Serious adverse events and adverse events specifically related to gabapentinoids were reported in one trial. No study included patient-focused psychological interventions in the deprescribing process, nor provided any long-term follow-up. This review highlights the lack of existing evidence in this area. Due to limited available data, our review was unable to make any firm judgements on the most effective gabapentinoid deprescribing interventions in adults, highlighting the need for more research in this area.

Towards Optimizing Hospitalized Older adults' MEdications (TO HOME): Multi-centre study of medication use and outcomes in routine care.

AIMS: Comprehensively investigate prescribing in usual care of hospitalized older people with respect to polypharmacy; potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) according to Beers criteria; and cumulative anticholinergic and sedative medication exposure calculated with Drug Burden Index (DBI). Specifically, to quantify exposure to these measures on admission, changes between admission and discharge, associations with adverse outcomes and medication costs. METHODS: Established new retrospective inpatient cohort of 2000 adults aged ≥75 years, consecutively admitted to 6 hospitals in Sydney, Australia, with detailed information on medications, clinical characteristics and outcomes. Conducted cross-sectional analyses of index admission data from cohort. RESULTS: Cohort had mean (standard deviation) age 86.0 (5.8) years, 59% female, 21% from residential aged care. On admission, prevalence of polypharmacy was 77%, PIMs 34% and DBI > 0 in 53%. From admission to discharge, mean difference (95% confidence interval) in total number of medications increased 1.05 (0.92, 1.18); while prevalence of exposure to PIMs (-3.8% [-5.4, -2.1]) and mean DBI score (-0.02 [-0.04, -0.01]) decreased. PIMs and DBI score were associated with increased risks (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval]) of falls (PIMs 1.63 [1.28, 2.08]; DBI score 1.21[1.00, 1.46]) and delirium (PIMs 1.76 [1.38, 1.46]; DBI score 1.42 [1.19, 1.71]). Each measure was associated with increased risk of adverse drug reactions (polypharmacy 1.42 [1.19, 1.71]; PIMs 1.87 [1.40, 2.49]; DBI score 1.90 [1.55, 2.15]). Cost (AU$/patient/hospital day) of medications contributing to PIMs and DBI was low ($0.29 and $0.88). CONCLUSION: In this large cohort of older inpatients, usual hospital care results in an increase in number of medications and small reductions in PIMs and DBI, with variable associations with adverse outcomes.

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.

Preferences for deprescribing antihypertensive medications amongst clinicians, carers and people living with dementia: a discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: Optimal management of hypertension in people with dementia may involve deprescribing antihypertensives. Understanding differing treatment priorities is important to enable patient-centred care. This study explored preferences for antihypertensive deprescribing amongst people living with dementia, carers and clinicians. METHODS: Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are a stated preference survey method, underpinned by economic theory. A DCE was conducted, and respondents completed 12 labelled choice-questions, each presenting a status quo (continuing antihypertensives) and antihypertensive deprescribing option. The questions included six attributes, including pill burden, and event risks for stroke, myocardial infarction, increased blood pressure, cognitive decline, falls. RESULTS: Overall, 112 respondents (33 carers, 19 people living with dementia, and 60 clinicians) completed the survey. For people with dementia, lower pill burden increased preferences for deprescribing (odds ratio (OR) 1.95, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.08-3.52). Increased stroke risk (for each additional person out of 100 having a stroke) decreased the likelihood of deprescribing for geriatricians (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.55-0.92) and non-geriatrician clinicians (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.86), and carers (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.58-0.88). Increased myocardial infarction risk decreased preferences for deprescribing for non-geriatricians (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.69-0.95) and carers (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.73-0.98). Avoiding cognitive decline increased preferences for deprescribing for geriatricians (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.03-1.33) and carers (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.09-1.48). Avoiding falls increased preferences for deprescribing for clinicians (geriatricians (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.11-1.29); non-geriatricians (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.07-1.25)). Other attributes did not significantly influence respondent preferences. CONCLUSIONS: Antihypertensive deprescribing preferences differ amongst people with dementia, carers and clinicians. The study emphasises the importance of shared decision-making within the deprescribing process.

Potential factors that can affect the performance of undergraduate pharmacy research students: a descriptive study.

OBJECTIVE: This descriptive study aimed to examine whether student past coursework performance, student or research supervisor characteristics, and the type of research project are related to the overall academic performance of a pharmacy student completing an honours research program. METHODS: Data on undergraduate honours students who completed a Bachelor of Pharmacy degree at The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia, between Jan 2015 and Dec 2020 was collected. This included socio-demographic characteristics, type of project undertaken, and academic outputs. Data was also collected on each supervisor's academic role, level of experience, research area, and where they completed their PhD. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the study cohort and correlation analysis and unpaired t-tail analyses were conducted using SPSS software. RESULTS: This five year study included 130 students of which 67% were female and 60% were domestic students. Each student was supervised by one of 48 individual academics who were a mix of early- (31%), mid-career (29%), and experienced researchers (40%) for pharmaceutical science (50%), clinical (45%), and education (5%) projects. Just less than half (49%) of students published one peer-reviewed journal article. Female students outperformed male students (p = 0.031) with female students also twice as likely (15%) to receive a university medal eligible mark compared with male students (7.0%). Similarly, domestic students were twice as likely (15%) to receive a university medal eligible mark when compared with international students (7.7%). Students who undertook a pharmaceutical science-based project outperformed education-based project students (p = 0.0235). Students who had published at least one peer-reviewed journal article outperformed those who had not published (p = 0.0014). CONCLUSION: Factors that affected honours performance were student gender, residential status, type of project undertaken, and whether a student had published a peer-reviewed journal article.

Association Between Potentially Inappropriate Medications and 30-Day Post-Hospital Discharge Outcomes in US Veterans.

BACKGROUND: Potentially inappropriate medication (PIMs) use is common in older inpatients and it may lead to increased risk of adverse drug events. OBJECTIVES: To examine prevalence of PIMs at hospital discharge and its contribution to health care utilization and mortality within 30-days of hospital discharge. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort of 117 570 veterans aged ≥65 years and hospitalized in 2013. PIMs at discharge were categorized into central nervous system acting (CNS) and non-CNS. Outcomes within 30-days of hospital discharge were: (1) time to first acute care hospital readmission, and all-cause mortality, (2) an emergency room visit, and (3) ≥3 primary care clinic visits. RESULTS: The cohort's mean age was 74.3 years (SD 8.1), with 51.3% exposed to CNS and 62.8% to non-CNS PIMs. Use of CNS and non-CNS PIMs, respectively, was associated with a reduced risk of readmission, with an adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of 0.93 (95% CI = 0.89-0.96) for ≥2 (vs 0) CNS PIMs and an aHR of 0.85 (95% CI = 0.82-0.88) for ≥2 (vs 0) non-CNS PIMs. Use of CNS PIMs (≥2 vs 0) was associated with increased risk of mortality (aHR = 1.37 [95% CI = 1.25-1.51]), whereas non-CNS PIMs use was associated with a reduced risk of mortality (aHR = 0.75 [95% CI = 0.69-0.82]). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: PIMs were highly common in this veteran cohort, and the association with outcomes differed by PIMs. Thus, it is important to consider whether PIMs are CNS acting to optimize short-term posthospitalization outcomes.

The anticholinergic burden: from research to practice.

Drugs with anticholinergic effects are known to cause adverse effects such as dry mouth, constipation and urinary retention. In older people drugs with anticholinergic effects may contribute to cognitive decline and a loss of functional capacity. Many drugs that are not in the anticholinergic drug class also have anticholinergic effects. They include antidepressants, antipsychotics and antihistamines. Taking multiple drugs with anticholinergic effects creates an anticholinergic burden. It is important that clinicians identify which patients are at risk. There are several tools to assess the anticholinergic burden. Clinicians can use these tools to make a pharmacological risk assessment when reviewing a patient's medicines. This can assist decisions about continuing or stopping drugs with anticholinergic effects. Deprescribing drugs with anticholinergic effects has several potential benefits in older people. In addition to reversing adverse effects, deprescribing may prevent problems such as falls.

Interventions at Hospital Discharge to Guide Caregivers in Medication Management for People Living with Dementia: a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Hospital discharge has a significant impact on the continuity of care for people living with dementia. Clear guidance on medication management should be provided to caregivers of people living with dementia to ensure appropriate use of medications post-discharge. AIM: Identify and appraise the impact of interventions at hospital discharge to guide caregivers in the medication management for people living with dementia. METHOD: A systematic search of original studies was performed in Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. Articles published in English that reported on interventions to guide caregivers in medication management for people living with dementia were included. Two authors independently reviewed titles and abstract. Full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and quality assessment was conducted by two authors. RESULTS: A total of five studies were included with a range of interventions that were typically delivered post-discharge by a multidisciplinary team and most targeted administration of medications by caregivers. Overall, three types of discharge interventions were identified including a pre-discharge caregiver educational intervention, a post-discharge multidisciplinary team intervention, and discharge summary documentation intervention at transitions of care. Of these, a pre-discharge caregiver education led to shorter hospital stay (25 days vs. 31 days, p = 0.005). A post-discharge intervention that included follow-up visits resulted in lower use of high-risk medications (19% vs. 40%), and reduction in 30-day re-hospitalization rates (11% vs. 20%). In contrast, in another post-discharge intervention study, no difference in one-month re-hospitalization rates (8.4% vs. 8.0%, p = 0.82) was demonstrated. In another study, a post-discharge hospital educational program provided to caregivers  led to significantly reduced caregiver burden (31.7 ± 17.6 (SD) pre-intervention to 27.7 ± 16.9 (SD) post-intervention (p = 0.037)). DISCUSSION: Current findings suggest there is a need for well-designed interventions to guide caregivers in all aspects of medication management for people living with dementia, and should include support for caregivers in care coordination.

Prevalence of adverse drug events and adverse drug reactions in hospital among older patients with dementia: A systematic review.

AIMS: This systematic review aimed to quantify the prevalence of adverse drug events (ADEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in older inpatients with dementia. METHODS: A systematic search of observational studies was performed in Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Scopus and Informit. Articles published in English that reported the prevalence of ADEs or ADRs in hospital patients aged 65 years or older with dementia were included. Two authors reviewed titles and abstracts and all eligible full-text articles. Relevant information relating to ADEs, ADRs and dementia was obtained from each article. RESULTS: In total, 5 articles were included. One study reported the prevalence of ADEs to be 81.5%, defined using the Naranjo algorithm. Four studies assessed the prevalence of ADRs, ranging from 12.7 to 24.0%, assessed using various methods. One study defined ADRs according to the World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Centre criteria, 2 studies employed the World Health Organization definition and 1 study did not explicitly define ADRs. The most frequently reported drug classes implicated in ADEs and ADRs were psychotropic, antihypertensive and analgesic drugs. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a high prevalence of ADEs and ADRs in older inpatients with dementia. However, only 1 study documented ADEs and there was variability in approaches to ADR assessment. A greater understanding of ADEs and ADRs, as well as tailored assessment tools, will promote prevention of ADEs and ADRs in people with dementia.

Impact of the Goal-directed Medication Review Electronic Decision Support System on Drug Burden Index: A cluster-randomised clinical trial in primary care.

AIMS: The Goal-directed Medication Review Electronic Decision Support System (G-MEDSS) assesses and reports a patient's goals, attitudes to deprescribing and Drug Burden Index (DBI) score, a measure of cumulative exposure to anticholinergic and sedative medications. This study evaluated the effect of implementing G-MEDSS in home medicines reviews (HMRs) on DBI exposure and clinical outcomes. METHODS: A cluster-randomised clinical trial was performed across Australia. Accredited clinical pharmacists were randomised into intervention (G-MEDSS with usual care HMR) or comparison groups (usual care HMR alone). Patients were recruited by pharmacists from those routinely referred by general practitioners for HMR. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with any reduction in DBI at 3-months follow-up. Secondary outcomes included change in DBI continuous score at 3-months, HMR recommendations to change DBI and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: There were 201 patient participants at baseline (n = 88 intervention, n = 113 comparison), with 159 followed-up at 3-months (n = 63 intervention, n = 96 comparison). The proportion of patients with a reduction in DBI was not significantly different at 3-months (intervention 17%, comparison 11%; adjusted odds ratio 1.44, 95% confidence interval 0.56-3.80). Regarding secondary outcomes, there was no difference in change in DBI score at 3-months. However, the HMR report made recommendations to reduce DBI for a significantly greater proportion of patients in the intervention than in the comparison group (intervention 37%, comparison 14%; adjusted odds ratio 3.20, 95% confidence interval 1.50-6.90). No changes were observed in clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: Implementation of G-MEDSS within HMR did not reduce patients' DBI at 3 months compared with usual care HMR.

Quantifying cumulative anticholinergic and sedative drug load among US Medicare Beneficiaries.

PURPOSE: Medications with anticholinergic and sedative properties are widely used among older adults despite strong evidence of harm. The drug burden index (DBI), a pharmacological screening tool, measures these properties across drug classes, and higher DBI drug exposure (DBI > 1) has been associated with certain physical function-related adverse events. Our aim was to quantify mean daily DBI drug exposure among older adults in the United States (US). METHODS: We screened medications for DBI properties and operationalized the DBI for US Medicare claims. We then conducted a retrospective cohort study of a 20% random, nationwide sample of 4 137 384 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged 66+ years (134 757 039 person-months) from January 2013 to December 2016. We measured the monthly distribution based on mean daily DBI, categorized as (a) >0 vs 0 (any use) and (b) 0, 0 < DBI ≤ 1, 1 < DBI ≤ 2, and DBI > 2, and examined temporal trends. We described patient-level factors (eg, demographics, healthcare use) associated with high (>2) vs low (0 < DBI≤1) DBI drug exposure. RESULTS: The distribution of the mean daily DBI, aggregated at the month-level, was: 58.1% DBI = 0, 29.0% 0 < DBI≤1, 9.3% 1 < DBI≤2, and 3.7% DBI > 2. Predictors of high monthly DBI drug exposure (DBI > 2) included certain indicators of increased healthcare use (eg, high number of drug claims), white race, younger age, frailty, and a psychosis diagnosis code. CONCLUSIONS: The predictors of high DBI drug exposure can inform discussions between patients and providers about medication appropriateness and potential de-prescribing. Future Medicare-based studies should assess the association between the DBI and adverse events.

Tools to evaluate medication management for caregivers of people living with dementia: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Caregivers often undertake medication management for people living with dementia without formal training. There is a need to evaluate caregiver medication management practices for people living with dementia to identify and address the key issues that contribute to caregiver burden. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify and summarize approaches that evaluate medication management for caregivers of people living with dementia and appraise caregiver's involvement in aspects of medication management. SEARCH STRATEGY: A systematic search was undertaken in five databases: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts. Studies written in English that contained tools and surveys that evaluated aspects of medication management for caregivers of PWD were included. RESULTS: A total of 10 studies were included. Medication selection was assessed in six studies, supply and monitoring/review was captured in seven studies, with administration assessed in nine studies. Caregivers were commonly involved in decision-making for medication changes (77.1%-86.8%) and in the ordering (55.9%-86.0%) and collection (87.0%-92.4%) of medications. Reported caregiver involvement in medication administration showed a wide range (44%-94.7%) between the studies. Challenges in administration were commonly related to polypharmacy and dosage regimen complexity. CONCLUSIONS: Current tools capture specific aspects of medication management, with medication administration the most evaluated aspect of medication management. Future research is needed to develop a tool to holistically evaluate the complexities of medication management for caregivers of people living with dementia to minimize adverse events at transitions of care. PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: From the authors' previous research, caregivers highlighted the need to address key issues in medication management for people living with dementia.

Effectiveness of interventions on the appropriate use of opioids for noncancer pain among hospital inpatients: A systematic review.

AIMS: To summarise the effectiveness of interventions on appropriate opioid use for noncancer pain among hospital inpatients. METHODS: Two reviewers independently searched 6 databases up to March 2018 original research articles reporting on quantitative outcomes of interventions on appropriate opioid use among hospital inpatients. Appropriate opioid use was measured by changes in prescribing, such as the lowest effective opioid dose and duration, or clinical outcomes such as adequate pain control. Quality and intervention complexity assessments were performed by 2 independent reviewers. The full methodological approach was published on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42019145947). RESULTS: Of 398 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 37 articles were included in the review. Most articles had a moderate or high risk of bias (27 of 37 studies). Thirty-one articles primarily addressed appropriate opioid use and 6 articles targeted opioid safety as a secondary outcome. A multifaceted approach was the most common primary intervention (16 studies) and adequate pain control was the main outcome measured (14 studies). Health provider education, reinforced by hard-copy material and feedback, was associated with a 13.0 to 29.5% increase in the proportion of opioid prescriptions written in concordance with local guidelines and reduced pain scores ranging from 7.0 to 34.5%. Interventions to improve opioid safety in patient-controlled analgesia reduced medication errors by up to 89.1%. CONCLUSION: Interventions involving academic detailing and education, especially when reinforced by feedback, show positive effects on appropriate opioid use among hospital inpatients. Future studies investigating the impact of administrative interventions on opioid use and related outcomes are warranted.

The Effectiveness of Stewardship Interventions to Reduce the Prescribing of Extended-Release Opioids for Acute Pain: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of stewardship interventions in reducing the prescribing of extended-release opioids for acute pain. DESIGN: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials, pre-post intervention studies, cohort studies and case-control studies. METHODS: A search was conducted using Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and PsycINFO from inception to March 24, 2019. Search terms included opioids, interventions, extended-release, and acute pain. Included articles were original research articles outlining the impact of stewardship interventions on reducing the prescribing of extended-release opioids for acute pain. RESULTS: The search resulted in 1,264 articles after the removal of duplicates. Of these, 141 full texts were assessed, with three eligible for inclusion. One additional article was obtained via a manual search. Three studies explored forcing function interventions; two included prior authorization policies, which saw decreases in extended-release/long-acting scripts by 18-36%, while another evaluated order restrictions producing increased adherence to guidelines by 36%. One study explored the impact of education targeting prescribers and patients through a risk mitigation and evaluation strategy, which decreased extended-release/long-acting quarterly script volumes by 4.3%. All studies were performed at system levels. Forcing function interventions decreased extended-release/long-acting prescriptions and increased adherence to guidelines to a greater extent than less restrictive interventions such as education. CONCLUSIONS: Forcing function interventions implemented at system levels show promise in decreasing the prescribing of extended-release opioids for acute pain. The current lack of literature warrants future research to increase understanding of the effectiveness of such interventions.

Withdrawal of antihypertensive drugs in older people.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is an important risk factor for subsequent cardiovascular events, including ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, cognitive decline and premature death. Overall, the use of antihypertensive medications has led to reduction in cardiovascular disease, morbidity rates and mortality rates. However, the use of antihypertensive medications is also associated with harms, especially in older people, including the development of adverse drug reactions, drug-drug interactions and can contribute to increasing medication-related burden. As such, discontinuation of antihypertensives may be considered and appropriate in some older people. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether withdrawal of antihypertensive medications is feasible, and evaluate the effects of withdrawal of antihypertensive medications on mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, hypertension and quality of life in older people. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials up to April 2019: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, CENTRAL (2019, Issue 3), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also conducted reference checking, citation searches and, when appropriate, contacted study authors to identify any additional studies. The searches had no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of withdrawal versus continuation of antihypertensive medications used for hypertension or primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in older adults (defined as 50 years and over). Participants were eligible if they lived in the community, residential aged care facilities, or were based in hospital settings. We sought to include trials looking at the complete withdrawal of the antihypertensive medication, and those focusing on a dose reduction of the antihypertensive medicine. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We compared the intervention of discontinuing or reducing antihypertensive medication to usual treatment using mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for continuous variables and we used Peto odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CI for binary variables. Our primary outcomes included: mortality, myocardial infarction, development of adverse drug reactions or adverse drug withdrawal reactions. Secondary outcomes included: blood pressure, hospitalisation, stroke, success of withdrawing from antihypertensives, quality of life, and falls. Two authors independently, and in duplicate, conducted all stages of study selection, data extraction and quality assessment. MAIN RESULTS: Six RCTs met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review (1073 participants). Study duration and follow-up ranged from 4 weeks to 56 weeks. Meta-analysis of studies showed that, in the discontinuation group compared to continuation, the odds for all-cause mortality were 2.08 (95% CI 0.79 to 5.46; low certainty of evidence), for myocardial infarction 1.86 (95% CI 0.19 to 17.98; very low certainty of evidence) and for stroke 1.44 (95% CI 0.25 to 8.35; low certainty of evidence). Blood pressure was higher in the discontinuation group than the continuation group (systolic blood pressure: MD = 9.75 mmHg, 95% CI 7.33 to 12.18; and diastolic blood pressure: MD = 3.5 mmHg, 95% CI 1.82 to 5.18; low certainty of evidence). For the development of adverse events, meta-analysis was not possible; antihypertensive discontinuation did not appear to increase the risk of adverse events and may lead to resolution of adverse drug reactions, although eligible studies had limited reporting of adverse effects of drug withdrawal (very low certainty of evidence). One study reported hospitalisation with an odds ratio of 0.83 for discontinuation compared to continuation (95% CI 0.33 to 2.10; low certainty of evidence). No studies were identified which reported falls. Between 10.5% and 33.3% of participants in the discontinuation group compared to 9% to 15% in the continuation group experienced raised blood pressure or other clinical criteria (as pre-defined by the studies) that would require restarting of therapy/removal from the study. The sources of bias included selective reporting (reporting bias), lack of blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias), incomplete outcome data (attrition bias), and lack of blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence of an effect of discontinuing compared with continuing antihypertensives used for hypertension or primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in older adults on all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction. The evidence was low to very low certainty mainly due to small studies and low event rates. These limitations mean that we cannot make any firm conclusions about the effect of deprescribing antihypertensives on these outcomes. Future research should focus on populations with the greatest uncertainty of the benefit:risk ratio for use of antihypertensive medications, such as those with frailty, older age groups and those taking polypharmacy, and measure clinically important outcomes such as falls, quality of life and adverse drug events.

Correction to: Implementation of the goal-directed medication review electronic decision support system (G-MEDSS)© into home medicines review: a protocol for a clusterrandomised clinical trial in older adults.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.