Older adults' attitudes towards deprescribing and medication changes: a longitudinal sub-study of a cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between older patients' willingness to have one or more medications deprescribed and: (1) change in medications, (2) change in the appropriateness of medications and (3) implementation of prescribing recommendations generated by the electronic decision support system tested in the 'Optimising PharmacoTherapy In the Multimorbid Elderly in Primary CAre' (OPTICA) trial. DESIGN: A longitudinal sub-study of the OPTICA trial, a cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Swiss primary care settings. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were aged ≥65 years, with ≥3 chronic conditions and ≥5 regular medications recruited from 43 general practitioner (GP) practices. EXPOSURES: Patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed was assessed using three questions from the 'revised Patient Attitudes Towards Deprescribing' (rPATD) questionnaire and its concerns about stopping score. MEASURES/ANALYSES: Medication-related outcomes were collected at 1 year follow-up. Aim 1 outcome: change in the number of long-term medications between baseline and 12 month follow-up. Aim 2 outcome: change in medication appropriateness (Medication Appropriateness Index). Aim 3 outcome: binary variable on whether any prescribing recommendation generated during the OPTICA medication review was implemented. We used multilevel linear regression analyses (aim 1 and aim 2) and multilevel logistic regression analyses (aim 3). Models were adjusted for sociodemographic variables and the clustering effect at GP level. RESULTS: 298 patients completed the rPATD, 45% were women and 78 years was the median age. A statistically significant association was found between the concerns about stopping score and the change in the number of medications over time (per 1-unit increase in the score the average number of medications use was 0.65 higher; 95% CI: 0.08 to 1.22). Other than that we did not find evidence for statistically significant associations between patients' agreement with deprescribing and medication-related outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence for an association between most measures of patient agreement with deprescribing and medication-related outcomes over 1 year. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03724539.

Effects of an interprofessional deprescribing intervention in Swiss nursing homes: the Individual Deprescribing Intervention (IDeI) randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Deprescribing polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) has been shown to be beneficial to nursing home (NH) residents' health. Medication reviews are the most widely studied deprescribing intervention; in a previous trial, we showed that another intervention, a deprescribing-focused interprofessional quality circle, can reduce the use of inappropriate medications at the NH level. However, this intervention cannot account for the variety of the residents' clinical situations. Therefore, we trialled a subsequent intervention in NH that enacted the quality circle intervention in the previous year. METHODS: In 7 NHs, the most heavily medicated residents were recruited and randomised to receive usual care or the intervention. The intervention was a pharmacist-led, deprescribing-focused medication review, followed by the creation of an individualised treatment modification plan in collaboration with nurses and physicians. Intervention's effects were assessed after four months on the number and dose of PIMs used, quality of life, and safety outcomes (mortality, hospitalisations, falls, and use of physical restraints). Data were analysed using Poisson multivariate regression models. RESULTS: Sixty-two NH residents participated, falling short of the expected 100 participants; 4 died before initial data collection. Participants used a very high number of drugs (median 15, inter-quartile range [12-19]) and PIMs (median 5, IQR [3-7]) at baseline. The intervention did not reduce the number of PIMs prescribed to the participants; however, it significantly decreased their dose (incidence rate ratio 0.763, CI95 [0.594; 0.979]), in particular for chronic drugs (IRR 0.716, CI95 [0.546; 0.938]). No adverse effects were seen on mortality, hospitalisations, falls, and restraints use, but, in the intervention group, three participants experienced adverse events that required the reintroduction of withdrawn treatments, and a decrease in quality of life is possible. CONCLUSIONS: As it did not reach its recruitment target, this trial should be seen as exploratory. Results indicate that, following a NH-level deprescribing intervention, a resident-level intervention can further reduce some aspects of PIMs use. Great attention must be paid to residents' well-being when further developing such deprescribing interventions, as a possible reduction in quality of life was found in the intervention group, and some participants suffered adverse events following deprescribing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03688542, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03688542 ), registered on 31.08.2018.

Effects of an interprofessional Quality Circle-Deprescribing Module (QC-DeMo) in Swiss nursing homes: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are common among nursing homes (NH) residents, as is polypharmacy. Deprescribing has emerged in the past decade as a safe and effective way to reduce the use of PIMs and improve patient outcomes. However, effective deprescribing interventions are expensive, as they require specialised staff and a great amount of time for each resident. The Quality Circle Deprescribing Module (QC-DeMo) intervention was designed to be less resource-intensive than medication reviews, the current deprescribing gold standard. It consists of a QC session in which physicians, nurses, and pharmacists define a local deprescribing consensus for specific PIMs classes, which is then implemented in the NH. The intervention was trialled in a RCT, with the NH as unit of analysis. METHODS: After randomisation, intervention NHs enacted the QC-DeMo at the start of the follow-up year. The primary outcomes were the proportion of PIM galenic units and number of PIM defined daily dose per average resident and per day (DDD/res). PIM status was assessed by a combination of the 2015 Beers list and the Norwegian General Practice-Nursing Home criteria. Secondary outcomes were the number of DDD/res to avoid and to reevaluate; safety outcomes were mortality, hospitalisations, falls, and use of physical restraints. Outcomes were evaluated at follow-up using linear regression models, adjusting for the outcome baseline values. RESULTS: Fifty-eight NHs took part in the trial; no individual residents were recruited. The intervention did not reduce the primary outcomes, but a strong trend towards reduction was seen for the number of PIM DDD/res, which accounts for the doses used. PIM DDD/res to reevaluate were significantly reduced, mostly through a reduction in the use of proton-pump inhibitors. Falls and use of physical restraints were not affected, but a statistical interaction between the mission of the NH (geriatric unit or specialised dementia unit) and the intervention group was seen for mortality and hospitalisations. CONCLUSIONS: The QC-DeMo intervention can reduce the use of some PIM classes, and could usefully complement other deprescribing interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03688542 ), registered on 26.09.2018, retrospectively registered.

Deprescribing in nursing homes: Protocol for nested, randomised controlled hybrid trials of deprescribing interventions.

INTRODUCTION: Polypharmacy and the use of potentially inappropriate medication (PIMs) are frequent among nursing home (NH) residents, and are associated with adverse health outcomes like falls, hospitalisation and death. Deprescribing has been proposed as a way to curtail both problems; however, the best way to implement deprescribing and its real impact are still unclear. This article describes nested trials of two consecutive deprescribing interventions, the first at the NH level, and the second at the resident level. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The first intervention (QC-DeMo) will be a deprescribing module to be carried out in existing interprofessional quality circles in NHs, with the goal to develop a NH-wide deprescribing consensus. Its effects will be evaluated on the use of PIMs and on patient safety outcomes such as death, hospitalisation and falls. All NHs in the cantons of Vaud and Fribourg with an integrated pharmacy service will be eligible. The second intervention (IDeI), at the resident level, will be a deprescribing-focused medication review, resulting in the implementation of a deprescribing plan. Its effects will be evaluated on the use of PIMs and chronic medications, and on quality of life. This second trial will take place in the NHs allocated to the intervention group of the first trial. All residents of these NHs over 65 years old, living in the NH for at least 4 months, and taking 5 or more medications will be eligible to participate. Both trials will be hybrid effectiveness and implementation trials, aiming to understand the implementation process for the interventions, and to identify barriers and facilitators. ETHICS, REGISTRATION AND FUNDING: Both trials were approved by the relevant ethics committee, registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (QC-DeMo: NCT03688542; IDeI: NCT03655405), and funded by the Swiss National Fund for Scientific Research.

Evolution of potentially inappropriate medication use in nursing homes: Retrospective analysis of drug consumption data.

BACKGROUND: The use of potentially inappropriate medication (PIMs) is frequent in nursing homes (NHs), and leads to worsened health outcomes for their residents. Numerous initiatives to curb their use have been launched. Most studies of PIMs use in NHs, however, focused on their prevalence, and provide few insights on the evolution of their use. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this analysis is to measure the evolution of PIMs use in the nursing NHs of western Switzerland taking part in an integrated pharmacy service (IPS). METHODS: Drug consumption data from 166 NHs were collected for 2014 to 2018, through the monitoring of the IPS. These data were cross-referenced with validated PIMs lists (Beers' list and Norwegian General Practice-Nursing Home, NORGEP-NH) to compute the number of potentially inappropriate defined daily doses per average resident (DDD/res) in each NH. Linear mixed-effects models were used to assess the evolution of PIMs use over time, following the NORGEP-NH classification of PIMs and the drug classes involved. RESULTS: In 2018, the number of DDD/res was 7.3 (SD 1.9); of those, 2.2 (SD 0.8) were potentially inappropriate. Psycholeptics, psychoanaleptics and antihypertenseives were the most-used PIMs. Between 2014 and 2018, the number of potentially inappropriate DDD/res decreased by 0.03 per year (CI95 [-0.05; -0.01]). CONCLUSIONS: This study complements others that focused on the prevalence of PIMs use in NHs. The statistically significant reduction in the use of PIMs is an encouraging sign, but is probably not clinically meaningful for NH residents. With the growing concerns of the potential harms of these drugs, more specific interventions and implementation strategies need to be developed to help clinicians further reduce their use in NHs.

[Deprescribing in nursing homes: comparative views of residents, their relatives, and healthcare professionals]. / Déprescrire en EMS: regards croisés entre les résidents, leurs proches et les professionnels de la santé.

Deprescribing, in order to reduce both polypharmacy and the use of potentially inappropriate medications, remains a challenge, especially in nursing homes. Healthcare professionals perceive residents of these homes as wary of change and reluctant to take part in such endeavours. The results of two studies, one qualitative and the other quantitative, show that, on the contrary, nursing home residents and their relatives would be ready to consider a treatment reduction, provided that time is invested to explain the expected benefits of such changes.

Déprescrire pour réduire l'usage de médicaments inappropriés et, plus généralement, diminuer la polymédication reste un défi, en particulier chez les résidents d'établissements médico-sociaux. Les professionnels de la santé actifs en institution perçoivent cette population comme réticente au changement et peu encline à s'engager dans une telle démarche. Pourtant, les résultats de trois études, les deux premières qualitatives, la dernière quantitative, indiquent que ces résidents, ainsi que leurs proches, seraient prêts à tester une réduction de leur traitement, pour autant que l'on prenne le temps de discuter avec eux des bénéfices potentiels.

Physicians', Nurses' and Pharmacists' Perceptions of Determinants to Deprescribing in Nursing Homes Considering Three Levels of Action: A Qualitative Study.

Background: Polypharmacy and the use of potentially inappropriate medications are frequent safety issues among nursing home (NH) residents. Deprescribing can significantly reduce the number of drugs used, medication costs, and mortality. This qualitative study sought to understand and compare the perceptions and practices of nurses, pharmacists, and physicians regarding deprescribing in Swiss NHs, referring to an implementation approach on three levels of action: the individual, the institution, and the healthcare system. Methods: Two focus groups were held with 21 participants: one focus group with 11 pharmacists, another with 10 nurses and six semi-structured interviews with physicians were conducted and focused on their individual experience and practices. They were audiotaped and fully transcribed, and a content analysis was performed using to MAXQDA (Ver 12) software. Results: (1) At an individual level, physicians were concerned by consequences of deprescribing in terms of safety. Nurses were closest to residents and stressed the importance of finding the right time, creating a bond of trust before deprescribing and considering the purpose of the stay in the NH. Pharmacists relied on structured guides for deprescribing, which led their reflection and practice. All professionals saw the complexity of the clinical situations, as well as residents' and relatives' fears of interruption of care. (2) At an institutional level, the professionals stressed the lack of time to discuss patients' health and treatment, while pre-existing interprofessional collaboration, specifically, quality circles, seemed useful tools to create common knowledge. In order to reduce prescriptions, better coordination between physicians, nurses, pharmacists and specialists seemed crucial. (3) At the health system level, funding still needs to be provided to consolidate the process, go beyond organisational constraints and ensure deprescribing serves the patient's wellbeing above all. Conclusions: At the individual level of implementation, the different healthcare professionals expressed specific concerns about deprescribing, depending on their defined role in NHs. Their perspective about the different levers to promote deprescribing at institutional and healthcare system levels converge towards interprofessional collaboration supported by the healthcare system. Specific funding and incentives are therefore needed to support a sustainable interprofessional team.