Prevalence and factors associated with inappropriate continuation of stress ulcer prophylaxis at discharge.

Stress ulcer prophylaxis is started in the critical care unit to decrease the risk of upper gastrointestinal ulcers in critically ill persons and to decrease mortality caused by stress ulcer complications. Unfortunately, the drugs are often continued after recovery through discharge, paving the way for unnecessary polypharmacy. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study including patients admitted to the adult critical care unit and started on the stress ulcer prophylaxis with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or histamine receptor 2 blocker (H2 blocker) with an aim to determine the prevalence of inappropriate continuation at discharge and associated factors. RESULT: 3200 people were initiated on stress ulcer prophylaxis, and the medication was continued in 1666 patients upon discharge. Indication for long-term use was not found in 744 of 1666, with a 44% prevalence of inappropriate continuation. A statistically significant association was found with the following risk factors: discharge disposition (home vs other medical facilities, p=0.002), overall length of stay (more than 10 days vs less than or equal to 10 days, p<0.0001), mechanical ventilator use (p<0.001), number of days on a mechanical ventilator (more than 2 days vs less than or equal to 2 days, p<0.001) and class of stress ulcer prophylaxis drug used (H2 blocker vs PPI, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The prevalence of inappropriate continuation was found to be higher than prior studies. Given the risk of unnecessary medication intake and the associated healthcare cost, a web-based quality improvement initiative is being considered.

Hungarian general practice paediatricians' antibiotic prescribing behaviour for suspected respiratory tract infections: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: Inappropriate antibiotic prescribing is a major cause of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The aim of this study was to explore paediatric general practitioners' (GP Peds) antibiotic prescription practice in suspected respiratory tract infections (RTIs), using the capability-opportunity-motivation-behaviour framework. DESIGN: The design is a qualitative study based on individual, semistructured telephone or virtual interviews. SETTING: Paediatric general practice in Hungary. We applied stratified maximum variation sampling to cover the categories of age, sex and geographical location of participants. PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed 22 GP Peds. Nine were male and 13 were female: 2 of them were less than 40 years old, 14 were between 40 and 60 years, and 6 were above 60 years. 10 worked in low-antibiotic prescription areas, 5 in areas with medium levels of antibiotic prescription, 3 in high-antibiotic prescription areas, and 4 in and around the capital city. RESULTS: Study participants had varying antibiotic prescription preferences. Personal experience and physical examination play a central role in GP Peds' diagnostic and treatment practice. Participants emphasised the need to treat children in their entirety, taking their personal medical record, social background and sometimes parents' preferences into account, besides the acute clinical manifestation of RTI. Most respondents were confident they apply the most effective therapy even if, in some cases, this meant prescribing medicines with a higher chance of contributing to the development of AMR. Some participants felt antibiotic prescription frequency has decreased in recent years. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that a more prudent attitude toward antibiotic prescribing may have become more common but also highlight relevant gaps in both physicians' and public knowledge of antibiotics and AMR. To reinforce awareness and close remaining gaps, Hungary should adopt its national AMR National Action Plan and further increase its efforts towards active professional communication and feedback for primary care physicians.

Managing polypharmacy through medication review tools - pros and cons.

Inappropriate polypharmacy is a common occurrence in elderly patients, resulting in increased adverse drug reactions, nonadherence, and increased healthcare costs. Medication review and deprescribing are the primary strategies described in the literature for dealing with problematic polypharmacy. To effectively carry out the medication review, various tools have been developed. These tools can support medication review in a variety of ways. Some tools include a list of medications requiring detailed attention, while others guide medical professionals with principles and algorithms for reviewing and prescribing medicines. A third category of tools focuses on tracking and identifying symptoms that may be due to drug-related problems.

Deprescribing of antidepressants: development of indicators of high-risk and overprescribing using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.

BACKGROUND: Antidepressants are first-line medications for many psychiatric disorders. However, their widespread long-term use in some indications (e.g., mild depression and insomnia) is concerning. Particularly in older adults with comorbidities and polypharmacy, who are more susceptible to adverse drug reactions, the risks and benefits of treatment should be regularly reviewed. The aim of this consensus process was to identify explicit criteria of potentially inappropriate antidepressant use (indicators) in order to support primary care clinicians in identifying situations, where deprescribing of antidepressants should be considered. METHODS: We used the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to identify the indicators of high-risk and overprescribing of antidepressants. We combined a structured literature review with a 3-round expert panel, with results discussed in moderated meetings in between rounds. Each of the 282 candidate indicators was scored on a 9-point Likert scale representing the necessity of a critical review of antidepressant continuation (1-3 = not necessary; 4-6 = uncertain; 7-9 = clearly necessary). Experts rated the indicators for the necessity of review, since decisions to deprescribe require considerations of patient risk/benefit balance and preferences. Indicators with a median necessity rating of ≥ 7 without disagreement after 3 rating rounds were accepted. RESULTS: The expert panel comprised 2 general practitioners, 2 clinical pharmacologists, 1 gerontopsychiatrist, 2 psychiatrists, and 3 internists/geriatricians (total N = 10). After 3 assessment rounds, there was consensus for 37 indicators of high-risk and 25 indicators of overprescribing, where critical reviews were felt to be necessary. High-risk prescribing indicators included settings posing risks of drug-drug, drug-disease, and drug-age interactions or the occurrence of adverse drug reactions. Indicators with the highest ratings included those suggesting the possibility of cardiovascular risks (QTc prolongation), delirium, gastrointestinal bleeding, and liver injury in specific patient subgroups with additional risk factors. Overprescribing indicators target patients with long treatment durations for depression, anxiety, and insomnia as well as high doses for pain and insomnia. CONCLUSIONS: Explicit indicators of antidepressant high-risk and overprescribing may be used directly by patients and health care providers, and integrated within clinical decision support tools, in order to improve the overall risk/benefit balance of this commonly prescribed class of prescription drugs.

The impact of hospitalization on inappropriate prescribing and polypharmacy in older patients: A descriptive cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy and the use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in older individuals are widespread phenomena that are associated with an increase in morbidity and mortality. The Beers Criteria is a tool that helps to identify patients that are prescribed with PIMs, thereby reducing the risk of associated harm. Amongst other populations, the criteria identify drugs that should not be used by the majority of older patients. AIM: Determining the proportion of older inpatients who were discharged from hospitalization with polypharmacy (a prescription for more than seven drugs), or with a PIM as defined by the Beers Criteria. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study based on patients aged 65 and over who were hospitalized in the years 2019-2021 in the internal medicine, orthopedic and surgical wards at a medium-size hospital. Demographic information and details about drug treatment were collected from the electronic patient records system. Patients who died during hospitalization were excluded from the study group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of inpatients with polypharmacy or a PIM as part of their regular prescription, at the time of admission and at discharge. RESULTS: 49 564 patients were included in the study cohort. At discharge, 19% of the patients were given a prescription for a PIM, with a small but significant decrease compared with the rate admission (22.1%). At discharge, 42.8% of patients had polypharmacy, representing a small but significant increase compared with the rate on admission (40.6%). CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated high baseline rates of PIM prescription and polypharmacy. Hospitalization was associated with a decrease in PIM prescription and an increase in polypharmacy. This highlights the importance of medication review during admission to reduce the potential risk to older adults from polypharmacy and PIM prescription.

Potentially inappropriate prescriptions for poly-treated patients in long-term care facilities: retrospective pharmacoutilization analysis.

BACKGROUND This study aimed to investigate, among elderly patients in long-term care (LTC) facilities, potentially inappropriate drug prescriptions, potentially interactions and verify whether they can be traced back to hospitalisations or accesses to the Emergency Department (ED). The study data were acquired by means of a case report form investigating the medication management process in LTCs. MATERIAL AND METHODS Analysis of pharmacutilisation in LTCFs patients aged ≥65 years on polypharmacy or excessive polypharmacy, January-July 2023. Data was extracted from a database (DB) containing the monthly prescriptions of medicines supplied by direct distribution (DD) to LTCs. The prevalence of PIMs was evaluated by applying the Beers and STOPP criteria to the medication profile of each patient. RESULTS The overall prevalence of polypharmacy and hyperpolypharmacy was 83% and 17%, respectively. PIMs were defined using Beers and STOPP criteria. The most frequent PIMs were proton pump inhibitors (19% e 15%), antiplatelets agent (17% e 13%) and non-associated sulfonamides (14% e 12%). Of the 1,921 PIMs, 121 were contraindicated or very serious (6%) and 1,800 were major (94%).The most common medicaments involved in drug-drug interaction are furosemide (21%), sertraline (19%), pantoprazole (16%) e trazodone (15%). LTCs participating in the study (56%) excluded polypharmacy as a cause of access to the ED and ADRs. Therefore no case was ever reported (100%). CONCLUSIONS Polypharmacy or excessive polypharmacy among elderly patients may increase PIMs and ADRs. A constant review of the therapeutic regimens and deprescribing decrease inappropriate use of medications and interactions, ADRs, and accesses to the ED with consequent reduction of pharmaceutical spending.

Examining Antimicrobial Stewardship Program Implementation in Carceral Settings.

Antimicrobial resistance is a global threat that inequitably affects minoritized populations, including Black, Latinx, and Indigenous people-especially in carceral settings-and is largely driven by inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing practices. People whose identities are minoritized are more likely to be incarcerated, and people who are incarcerated experience higher disease risk than people who are not incarcerated. This article draws on a case of dental infection suffered by a woman who is incarcerated to consider key ethical and clinical complexities of antimicrobial prescribing in carceral settings.

Drivers of district-level differences in outpatient antibiotic prescribing in Germany: a qualitative study with prescribers.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have identified substantial regional variations in outpatient antibiotic prescribing in Germany, both in the paediatric and adult population. This indicates inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in some regions, which should be avoided to reduce antimicrobial resistance and potential side effects. The reasons for regional variations in outpatient antibiotic prescribing are not yet completely understood; socioeconomic and health care density differences between regions do not fully explain such differences. Here, we apply a behavioural perspective by adapting the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to examine regional factors deemed relevant for outpatient antibiotic prescriptions by paediatricians and general practitioners. METHODS: Qualitative study with guideline-based telephone interviews of 40 prescribers (paediatricians and general practitioners) in outpatient settings from regions with high and low rates of antibiotic prescriptions, stratified by urbanity. TDF domains formed the basis of an interview guide to assess region-level resources and barriers to rational antibiotic prescription behaviour. Interviews lasted 30-61 min (M = 45 min). Thematic analysis was used to identify thematic clusters, and relationships between themes were explored through proximity estimation. RESULTS: Both paediatricians and general practitioners in low-prescribing regions reported supporting contextual factors (in particular good collegial networks, good collaboration with laboratories) and social factors (collegial support and low patient demand for antibiotics) as important resources. In high-prescribing regions, poor coordination between in-patient and ambulatory health services, lack of region-level information on antimicrobial resistance, few professional development opportunities, and regional variations in patient expectations were identified as barriers to rational prescribing behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions targeting professional development, better collaboration structures with laboratories and clearer and user-friendly guidelines could potentially support rational antibiotic prescribing behaviour. In addition, better networking and social support among physicians could support lower prescription rates.

Pharmacoeconomics of medicines used for geriatric individuals in a tertiary care hospital in Delhi.

BACKGROUND OBJECTIVES: Expenditure on healthcare is a major concern in the geriatric age group. The current study was carried out to assess the expenditure patterns on medicines utilized in geriatric inpatients. METHODS: An observational study was conducted on 1000 geriatric inpatients, aged ≥60 yr, admitted to the medicine unit. Data were collected regarding demographic characteristics, prescribed medicines, expenditure incurred on medicines, appropriateness of medicines prescribed and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Appropriateness of the prescribed medicines was determined using the American Geriatrics Society 2015 Updated Beers Criteria. RESULTS: Geriatric inpatients comprised 41.3 per cent of the total individuals admitted in the ward during the study period. A total of 8366 medicines were prescribed in 127 formulations. The total expenditure on prescribed medicines was INR 1,087,175 with a per capita expenditure of INR 1087.17. Parenteral medicines accounted for 91 per cent of the expenditure on medicines. Maximum expenditure (70%) was incurred on 11.9 per cent of the medicines prescribed. The per capita expenditure was significantly higher in individuals with comorbidities (P=0.03) and those who had a longer duration of hospital stay (P<0.0001). About 28.1 per cent prescriptions were inappropriate. ADRs (140) were observed in 139 (13.9%) inpatients. Individuals with inappropriate medicines prescriptions and ADRs had a longer duration of hospital stay and more number of medicines prescribed. INTERPRETATION CONCLUSIONS: Comorbidities, prolonged hospitalization, polypharmacy, inappropriate medicines and parenteral medicines being prescribed contribute to increased expenditure on medicines in geriatric inpatients. In view of the rising number of geriatric inpatients, there is a need to frame a drug policy for them along with surveillance of expenditure on prescribed medicines. This needs to be treated as a priority.

Improving Antibiotic Overuse in Primary Care: A Multimodal Quality Improvement Project.

PURPOSE: Antibiotic overuse has increased over time related to provider knowledge gaps about best practices, provider perception of patient expectations on receiving an antibiotic, possible pressure to see patients in a timely fashion, and concerns about decreased patient satisfaction when an antibiotic is not prescribed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that up to 30% of antibiotics are inappropriately prescribed in the outpatient setting. APPROACH: This quality improvement project consisted of a multimodal approach to decrease inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for viral upper respiratory infections (URIs) by using provider education, passive patient education, and clinical decision support tools based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations and the Be Antibiotic Aware tool. OUTCOMES: Following implementation, there was an 11% decrease in viral URI antibiotic prescribing, from a rate of 29.33% to 18.33% following the multimodal implementation. CONCLUSION: The use of evidence-based education and treatment guidelines was found to decrease inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for patients diagnosed with viral URIs.

A National Quality Improvement Collaborative to Improve Antibiotic Use in Pediatric Infections.

BACKGROUND: Nearly 25% of antibiotics prescribed to children are inappropriate or unnecessary, subjecting patients to avoidable adverse medication effects and cost. METHODS: We conducted a quality improvement initiative across 118 hospitals participating in the American Academy of Pediatrics Value in Inpatient Pediatrics Network 2020 to 2022. We aimed to increase the proportion of children receiving appropriate: (1) empirical, (2) definitive, and (3) duration of antibiotic therapy for community-acquired pneumonia, skin and soft tissue infections, and urinary tract infections to ≥85% by Jan 1, 2022. Sites reviewed encounters of children >60 days old evaluated in the emergency department or hospital. Interventions included monthly audit with feedback, educational webinars, peer coaching, order sets, and a mobile app containing site-specific, antibiogram-based treatment recommendations. Sites submitted 18 months of baseline, 2-months washout, and 10 months intervention data. We performed interrupted time series (analyses for each measure. RESULTS: Sites reviewed 43 916 encounters (30 799 preintervention, 13 117 post). Overall median [interquartile range] adherence to empirical, definitive, and duration of antibiotic therapy was 67% [65% to 70%]; 74% [72% to 75%] and 61% [58% to 65%], respectively at baseline and was 72% [71% to 72%]; 79% [79% to 80%] and 71% [69% to 73%], respectively, during the intervention period. Interrupted time series revealed a 13% (95% confidence interval: 1% to 26%) intercept change at intervention for empirical therapy and a 1.1% (95% confidence interval: 0.4% to 1.9%) monthly increase in adherence per month for antibiotic duration above baseline rates. Balancing measures of care escalation and revisit or readmission did not increase. CONCLUSIONS: This multisite collaborative increased appropriate antibiotic use for community-acquired pneumonia, skin and soft tissue infections, and urinary tract infection among diverse hospitals.

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

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

[Polypharmacy in older people].

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

Staffing and Antipsychotic Medication Use in Nursing Homes and Neighborhood Deprivation.

Importance: Inappropriate use of antipsychotic medications in nursing homes is a growing public health concern. Residents exposed to higher levels of socioeconomic deprivation in the area around a nursing home may be currently exposed, or have a long history of exposure, to more noise pollution, higher crime rates, and have less opportunities to safely go outside the facility, which may contribute to psychological stress and increased risk of receiving antipsychotic medications inappropriately. However, it is unclear whether neighborhood deprivation is associated with use of inappropriate antipsychotic medications and whether this outcome is different by facility staffing levels. Objective: To evaluate whether reported inappropriate antipsychotic medication use differs in severely and less severely deprived neighborhoods, and whether these differences are modified by higher levels of total nurse staffing. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a cross-sectional analysis of a national sample of nursing homes that linked across 3 national large-scale data sets for the year 2019. Analyses were conducted between April and June 2023. Exposure: Neighborhood deprivation status (severe vs less severe) and total staffing hours (registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, certified nursing assistant). Main Outcome and Measures: This study estimated the association between neighborhood deprivation and the percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication inappropriately in the nursing home at least once in the past week and how this varied by nursing home staffing through generalized estimating equations. Analyses were conducted on the facility level and adjusted for state fixed effects. Results: This study included 10 966 nursing homes (1867 [17.0%] in severely deprived neighborhoods and 9099 [83.0%] in less deprived neighborhoods). Unadjusted inappropriate antipsychotic medication use was greater in nursing homes located in severely deprived neighborhoods (mean [SD], 15.9% [10.7%] of residents) than in those in less deprived neighborhoods (mean [SD], 14.2% [8.8%] of residents). In adjusted models, inappropriate antipsychotic medication use was higher in severely deprived neighborhoods vs less deprived neighborhoods (19.2% vs 17.1%; adjusted mean difference, 2.0 [95% CI, 0.35 to 3.71] percentage points) in nursing homes that fell below critical levels of staffing (less than 3 hours of nurse staffing per resident-day). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that levels of staffing modify disparities seen in inappropriate antipsychotic medication use among nursing homes located in severely deprived neighborhoods compared with nursing homes in less deprived neighborhoods. These findings may have important implications for improving staffing in more severely deprived neighborhoods.

Physician Antipsychotic Overprescribing Letters and Cognitive, Behavioral, and Physical Health Outcomes Among People With Dementia: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Antipsychotics, such as quetiapine, are frequently prescribed to people with dementia to address behavioral symptoms but can also cause harm in this population. Objective: To determine whether warning letters to high prescribers of quetiapine can successfully reduce its use among patients with dementia and to investigate the impacts on patients' health outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial of overprescribing letters that began in April 2015 and included the highest-volume primary care physician (PCP) prescribers of quetiapine in original Medicare. Outcomes of patients with dementia were analyzed in repeated 90-day cross-sections through December 2018. Analyses were conducted from September 2021 to February 2024. Interventions: PCPs were randomized to a placebo letter or 3 overprescribing warning letters stating that their prescribing of quetiapine was high and under review by Medicare. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome of this analysis was patients' total quetiapine use in days per 90-day period (the original trial primary outcome was total quetiapine prescribing by study PCPs). Prespecified secondary outcomes included measures of cognitive function and behavioral symptoms from nursing home assessments, indicators of depression from screening questionnaires in assessments and diagnoses in claims, metabolic diagnoses derived from assessments and claims, indicators of use of the hospital and other health care services, and death. Outcomes were analyzed separately for patients living in nursing homes and in the community. Results: Of the 5055 study PCPs, 2528 were randomized to the placebo letter, and 2527 were randomized to the 3 warning letters. A total of 84 881 patients with dementia living in nursing homes and 261 288 community-dwelling patients with dementia were attributed to these PCPs. There were 92 874 baseline patients (mean [SD] age, 81.5 [10.5] years; 64 242 female [69.2%]). The intervention reduced quetiapine use among both nursing home patients (adjusted difference, -0.7 days; 95% CI, -1.3 to -0.1 days; P = .02) and community-dwelling patients (adjusted difference, -1.5 days; 95% CI, -1.8 to -1.1 days; P < .001). There were no detected adverse effects on cognitive function (cognitive function scale adjusted difference, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.03; P = .19), behavioral symptoms (agitated or reactive behavior adjusted difference, -0.2%; 95% CI -1.2% to 0.8% percentage points; P = .72), depression, metabolic diagnoses, or more severe outcomes, including hospitalization and death. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that overprescribing warning letters to PCPs safely reduced quetiapine prescribing to their patients with dementia. This intervention and others like it may be useful for future efforts to promote guideline-concordant care. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05172687.

Validated medication deprescribing instruments for patients with palliative care needs: a systematic review / Instrumentos validados de desprescripción de medicamentos para los pacientes que reciben cuidados paliativos: una revisión sistemática

Objectives: Patients with life-limiting illnesses are prone to unnecessary polypharmacy. Deprescribing tools may contribute to minimizing negative outcomes. Thus, the aims of the study were to identify validated instruments for deprescribing inappropriate medications for patients with palliative care needs and to assess the impact on clinical, humanistic, and economic outcomes. Methods: A systematic review was conducted in LILACS, PUBMED, EMBASE, COCHRANE, and WEB OF SCIENCE databases (until May 2021). A manual search was performed in the references of enrolled articles. The screening, eligibility, extraction, and bias risk assessment were carried out by 2 independent researchers. Experimental and observational studies were eligible for inclusion. Results: Out of the 5791 studies retrieved, after excluding duplicates (n = 1050), conducting title/abstract screening (n = 4741), and full reading (n = 41), only 1 study met the inclusion criteria. In this included study, a randomized controlled trial was conducted, which showed a high level of bias risk overall. Adults 75 years or older (n = 130) with limited life expectancy and polypharmacy were allocated to 2 groups [intervention arm (deprescribing); and control arm (usual care)]. Deprescribing was performed with the aid of the STOPPFrail tool. The mean number of inappropriate medications and monthly medication costs were significantly lower in the intervention arm. No statistically significant differences were found in terms of unscheduled hospital presentations, falls, fractures, mortality, and quality of life. Conclusions: Despite the availability of several instruments to support deprescribing in patients with palliative care needs, only 1 of them has undergone validation and robust assessment for effectiveness in clinical practice. The STOPPFrail tool appears to reduce the number of inappropriate medications for older people with limited life expectancy (and probably palliative care needs)...(AU)

Objetivo: Los pacientes con enfermedades terminales son propensos a la polifarmacia innecesaria. Las herramientas de desprescripción pueden contribuir a minimizar los resultados negativos. Por lo tanto, los objetivos del estudio fueron identificar instrumentos validados para la desprescripción de medicamentos inapropiados en pacientes con necesidades de cuidados paliativos y evaluar el impacto en los resultados clínicos, humanísticos y económicos. Métodos: Se realizó una revisión sistemática en las bases de datos LILACS, PUBMED, EMBASE, COCHRANE y WEB OF SCIENCE (hasta mayo de 2021). Se realizó una búsqueda manual en las referencias de los artículos incluidos. La selección, elegibilidad, extracción y evaluación del riesgo de sesgo se llevaron a cabo por dos investigadores independientes. Se aceptó la inclusión de estudios observacionales y experimentales. Resultados: De los 5791 estudios recuperados, después de excluir duplicados (n = 1050), realizar la selección de títulos/resúmenes (n = 4741) y la lectura completa (n = 41), solo un estudio cumplió con los criterios de inclusión. En este estudio incluido, se realizó un ensayo controlado aleatorizado, que mostró un alto nivel de riesgo de sesgo en general. A los adultos de 75 años o más (n = 130) con esperanza de vida limitada y polifarmacia se les asignaron dos grupos [grupo de intervención (desprescripción) y grupo de control (atención habitual)]. Se realizó la desprescripción con la ayuda de la herramienta STOPPFrail. El número promedio de medicamentos inapropiados y los costos mensuales de los medicamentos fueron significativamente más bajos en el grupo de intervención. No se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en términos de presentaciones hospitalarias no programadas, caídas, fracturas, mortalidad y calidad de vida. Conclusiones: A pesar de la disponibilidad de varias herramientas para apoyar la deprescripción en pacientes con necesidades de cuidados paliativos...(AU)

Instrumentos validados de desprescripción de medicamentos para los pacientes que reciben cuidados paliativos: una revisión sistemática / Validated medication deprescribing instruments for patients with palliative care needs: a systematic review

Objectives: Patients with life-limiting illnesses are prone to unnecessary polypharmacy. Deprescribing tools may contribute to minimizing negative outcomes. Thus, the aims of the study were to identify validated instruments for deprescribing inappropriate medications for patients with palliative care needs and to assess the impact on clinical, humanistic, and economic outcomes. Methods: A systematic review was conducted in LILACS, PUBMED, EMBASE, COCHRANE, and WEB OF SCIENCE databases (until May 2021). A manual search was performed in the references of enrolled articles. The screening, eligibility, extraction, and bias risk assessment were carried out by 2 independent researchers. Experimental and observational studies were eligible for inclusion. Results: Out of the 5791 studies retrieved, after excluding duplicates (n = 1050), conducting title/abstract screening (n = 4741), and full reading (n = 41), only 1 study met the inclusion criteria. In this included study, a randomized controlled trial was conducted, which showed a high level of bias risk overall. Adults 75 years or older (n = 130) with limited life expectancy and polypharmacy were allocated to 2 groups [intervention arm (deprescribing); and control arm (usual care)]. Deprescribing was performed with the aid of the STOPPFrail tool. The mean number of inappropriate medications and monthly medication costs were significantly lower in the intervention arm. No statistically significant differences were found in terms of unscheduled hospital presentations, falls, fractures, mortality, and quality of life. Conclusions: Despite the availability of several instruments to support deprescribing in patients with palliative care needs, only 1 of them has undergone validation and robust assessment for effectiveness in clinical practice. The STOPPFrail tool appears to reduce the number of inappropriate medications for older people with limited life expectancy (and probably palliative care needs)...(AU)

Objetivo: Los pacientes con enfermedades terminales son propensos a la polifarmacia innecesaria. Las herramientas de desprescripción pueden contribuir a minimizar los resultados negativos. Por lo tanto, los objetivos del estudio fueron identificar instrumentos validados para la desprescripción de medicamentos inapropiados en pacientes con necesidades de cuidados paliativos y evaluar el impacto en los resultados clínicos, humanísticos y económicos. Métodos: Se realizó una revisión sistemática en las bases de datos LILACS, PUBMED, EMBASE, COCHRANE y WEB OF SCIENCE (hasta mayo de 2021). Se realizó una búsqueda manual en las referencias de los artículos incluidos. La selección, elegibilidad, extracción y evaluación del riesgo de sesgo se llevaron a cabo por dos investigadores independientes. Se aceptó la inclusión de estudios observacionales y experimentales. Resultados: De los 5791 estudios recuperados, después de excluir duplicados (n = 1050), realizar la selección de títulos/resúmenes (n = 4741) y la lectura completa (n = 41), solo un estudio cumplió con los criterios de inclusión. En este estudio incluido, se realizó un ensayo controlado aleatorizado, que mostró un alto nivel de riesgo de sesgo en general. A los adultos de 75 años o más (n = 130) con esperanza de vida limitada y polifarmacia se les asignaron dos grupos [grupo de intervención (desprescripción) y grupo de control (atención habitual)]. Se realizó la desprescripción con la ayuda de la herramienta STOPPFrail. El número promedio de medicamentos inapropiados y los costos mensuales de los medicamentos fueron significativamente más bajos en el grupo de intervención. No se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en términos de presentaciones hospitalarias no programadas, caídas, fracturas, mortalidad y calidad de vida. Conclusiones: A pesar de la disponibilidad de varias herramientas para apoyar la deprescripción en pacientes con necesidades de cuidados paliativos...(AU)

Pragmatic trial evaluating the impact of simulation training on high-risk prescribing to older adults by junior physicians.

BACKGROUND: High-risk medications like benzodiazepines, sedative hypnotics, and antipsychotics are commonly prescribed for hospitalized older adults, despite guidelines recommending avoidance. Prior interventions have not fully addressed how physicians make such prescribing decisions, particularly when experiencing stress or cognitive overload. Simulation training may help improve prescribing decision-making but has not been evaluated for overprescribing. METHODS: In this two-arm pragmatic trial, we randomized 40 first-year medical resident physicians (i.e., interns) on inpatient general medicine services at an academic medical center to either intervention (a 40-minute immersive simulation training) or control (online educational training) groups. The primary outcome was the number of new benzodiazepine, sedative hypnotic, or antipsychotic orders for treatment-naïve older adults during hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included the same outcome by all providers, being discharged on one of the medications, and orders for related or control medications. Outcomes were measured using electronic health record data over each intern's service period (~2 weeks). Outcomes were evaluated using generalized estimating equations, adjusting for clustering. RESULTS: In total, 522 treatment-naïve older adult patients were included in analyses. Over follow-up, interns prescribed ≥1 high-risk medication for 13 (4.9%) intervention patients and 13 (5.0%) control patients. The intervention led to no difference in the number of new prescriptions (Rate Ratio [RR]: 0.85, 95%CI: 0.31-2.35) versus control and no difference in secondary outcomes. In secondary analyses, intervention interns wrote significantly fewer "as-needed" ("PRN") order types for the high-risk medications (RR: 0.29, 95%CI: 0.08-0.99), and instead tended to write more "one-time" orders than control interns, though this difference was not statistically significant (RR: 2.20, 95%CI: 0.60-7.99). CONCLUSIONS: Although this simulation intervention did not impact total high-risk prescribing for hospitalized older adults, it did influence how the interns prescribed, resulting in fewer PRN orders, suggesting possibly greater ownership of care. Future interventions should consider this insight and implementation lessons raised. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov(NCT04668248).

Deprescribing potential of commonly used medications among community-dwelling older adults: insights from a pharmacist's geriatric assessment.

Pharmacist's geriatric assessment can provide valuable insights into potential deprescribing targets, while including important information on various health-related domains. Data collected from a geriatric assessment questionnaire, for 388 patients, from the Croatian cohort of the EuroAgeism H2020 ESR 7 international project, along with guideline-based deprescribing criteria, were used to analyse potentially inappropriate prescribing of four medication groups (benzodiazepines (BZN), proton pump inhibitors (PPI), opioids, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID)), and to assess the deprescribing potential. Binary logistic regression was used to explore the effects of age, gender, number of medicines and diagnoses, self-reported health, frailty score, and healthcare utilization on the likelihood of needing deprescribing. More than half of participants (n = 216, 55.2%) are candidates for deprescribing, with 31.1% of PPI, 74.8% of NSAID, 75% of opioid, and 96.1% of BZN users meeting at least one criterion. Most common criteria for deprescribing were inappropriately long use and safety concerns. Women (aOR = 2.58; p < 0.001), those reporting poor self-reported health (aOR = 5.14; p < 0.001), and those exposed to polypharmacy (aOR = 1.29; p < 0.001) had higher odds of needing to have medicines deprescribed. The high rate of deprescribing potential warrants prompt action to increase patient safety and decrease polypharmacy. Pharmacist's geriatric assessment and deprescribing-focused medication review could be used to lead a personalised approach.