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.

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.

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

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

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.

Medication review and deprescribing in different healthcare settings: a position statement from an Italian scientific consortium.

Recent medical advancements have increased life expectancy, leading to a surge in patients affected by multiple chronic diseases and consequent polypharmacy, especially among older adults. This scenario increases the risk of drug interactions and adverse drug reactions, highlighting the need for medication review and deprescribing to reduce inappropriate medications and optimize therapeutic regimens, with the ultimate goal to improving patients' health and quality of life. This position statement from the Italian Scientific Consortium on medication review and deprescribing aims to describe key elements, strategies, tools, timing, and healthcare professionals to be involved, for the implementation of medication review and deprescribing in different healthcare settings (i.e., primary care, hospital, long-term care facilities, and palliative care). Challenges and potential solutions for the implementation of medication review and deprescribing are also discussed.

Decreasing polypharmacy in older adults with cancer: A pilot cluster-randomized trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Polypharmacy is prevalent in older adults with cancer and associated with multiple adverse outcomes. A single-site, cluster-randomized clinical trial will enroll older adults with cancer and polypharmacy starting chemotherapy and will assess the effectiveness and feasibility of deprescribing interventions by comparing two arms: a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention and a patient educational brochure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study will be conducted in two phases. In phase I, focus groups and semi-structured individual interviews will guide adaptation of deprescribing interventions for the oncology clinic (phase Ia), and eight patients will undergo the pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention with iterative adaptations (phase Ib). In phase II, a pilot cluster-randomized trial (n = 72) will compare a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention with a patient education brochure, with treating oncologists as the cluster. Both efficacy (relative dose intensity of planned chemotherapy, potentially inappropriate medications successfully deprescribed, chemotherapy toxicity, functional status, hospitalizations, falls, and symptoms) and implementation outcomes (barriers and facilitators) will be assessed. DISCUSSION: This study is anticipated to provide pilot data to inform a nationwide randomized clinical trial of deprescribing in older adults starting cancer treatment. The cluster randomization is intended to provide an initial estimate for the intervention effect as well as oncologists' intra-class correlation coefficient. Deprescribing interventions may improve outcomes in older adults starting cancer treatment, but these interventions are understudied in this population, and it is unknown how best to implement them into oncology practice. The results of this trial will inform the design of large, randomized phase III trials of deprescribing. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier:NCT05046171. Date of registration: September 16, 2021.

Developing a PRogram to Educate and Sensitize Caregivers to Reduce the Inappropriate Prescription Burden in the Elderly with Alzheimer's Disease (D-PRESCRIBE-AD): Trial protocol and rationale of an open-label pragmatic, prospective randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Potentially inappropriate prescribing of medications in older adults, particular those with dementia, can lead to adverse drug events including falls and fractures, worsening cognitive impairment, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. Educational mailings from health plans to patients and their providers to encourage deprescribing conversations may represent an effective, low-cost, "light touch", approach to reducing the burden of potentially inappropriate prescription use in older adults with dementia. OBJECTIVES: The objective of the Developing a PRogram to Educate and Sensitize Caregivers to Reduce the Inappropriate Prescription Burden in Elderly with Alzheimer's Disease (D-PRESCRIBE-AD) trial is to evaluate the effect of a health plan based multi-faceted educational outreach intervention to community dwelling patients with dementia who are currently prescribed sedative/hypnotics, antipsychotics, or strong anticholinergics. METHODS: The D-PRESCRIBE-AD is an open-label pragmatic, prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing three arms: 1) educational mailing to both the health plan patient and their prescribing physician (patient plus physician arm, n = 4814); 2) educational mailing to prescribing physician only (physician only arm, n = 4814); and 3) usual care (n = 4814) among patients with dementia enrolled in two large United States based health plans. The primary outcome is the absence of any dispensing of the targeted potentially inappropriate prescription during the 6-month study observation period after a 3-month black out period following the mailing. Secondary outcomes include dose-reduction, polypharmacy, healthcare utilization, mortality and therapeutic switching within targeted drug classes. CONCLUSION: This large pragmatic RCT will contribute to the evidence base on promoting deprescribing of potentially inappropriate medications among older adults with dementia. If successful, such light touch, inexpensive and highly scalable interventions have the potential to reduce the burden of potentially inappropriate prescribing for patients with dementia. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05147428.

Deintensification of potentially inappropriate medications amongst older frail people with type 2 diabetes: Protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial (D-MED study).

AIMS: Amongst elderly people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) over prescribing can result in emergency ambulance call-outs, falls and fractures and increased mortality, particularly in frail patients. Current clinical guidelines, however, remain focused on medication intensification rather than deintensification where appropriate. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an electronic decision-support system and training for the deintensification of potentially inappropriate medications amongst older frail people with T2D, when compared to 'usual' care at 12-months. METHODS: This study is an open-label, multi-site, two-armed pragmatic cluster-randomised trial. GP practices randomised to the 'enhanced care' group have an electronic decision support system installed and receive training on the tool and de-intensification of diabetes medications. The system flags eligible patients for possible deintensification of diabetes medications, linking the health care professional to a clinical algorithm. The primary outcome will be the number of patients at 12-months who have had potentially inappropriate diabetes medications de-intensified. RESULTS: Study recruitment commenced in June 2022. Data collection commenced in January 2023. Baseline data have been extracted from 40 practices (3145 patients). CONCLUSIONS: Digital technology, involving computer decision systems, may have the potential to reduce inappropriate medications and aid the process of de-intensification. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN53221378. Available at: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN53221378.

Are Lists of Potentially Inappropriate Medications Associated with Hospital Readmissions? A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Suboptimal prescribing, including the prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIM), is frequent in patients aged 65 years and older. PIMs are associated with adverse drug events, which may lead to hospital admissions and readmissions for the most serious cases. Several tools, known as lists of PIMs, can detect suboptimal prescription. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to identify which lists of PIMs are associated with hospital readmission of older patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for the period from 1 January 1991 up to 12 May 2022 to identify original studies assessing the association between PIMs and hospital readmissions or emergency department (ED) revisits within 30 days of discharge in older patients. This study is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 Checklist, and the risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for Cohort Studies (NOS) and the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). RESULTS: A total of six studies presenting four different lists of PIMs were included. Readmission rates varied from 4.3 to 25.5% and the odds ratio (OR) between PIMs and hospital readmission varied from 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59; 1.42] to 6.48 [95% CI 3.00; 14.00]. Only two studies found a statistically significant association between a list of PIMs and hospital readmission. These two studies used different tools: the Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions (STOPP) and the Screening Tool to Alert Doctors to Right Treatment (START) and a combination of Beers Criteria® and STOPP and START. CONCLUSION: This systematic review shows that the association between list of PIMs and 30-day unplanned readmissions remains unclear and seems dependent on the PIM detection tool. Further studies are needed to clarify this association. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021252107.

Using a mobile application to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing for older Brazilian adults in primary care: a triple-blind randomised clinical trial.

BACKGOUND: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) has been evaluated in several countries, and several strategies have been devised for deprescribing drugs in older adults. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a mobile application in reducing PIP for older adults in primary care facilities in Brazil. METHODS: This randomised, triple-blind, parallel-group trial was conducted in 22 public primary care facilities in Brazil. During the intervention phase, the general practitioners (GPs) were randomly allocated to the intervention (MPI Brasil app provides information about PIP, therapeutic alternatives and deprescribing) or control (MedSUS app provides general information about medications) group. All GPs were trained on the Clinical Decision-Making Process and how to access an Evidence-Based Health website. The GPs received an Android tablet with an installed mobile application depending on their allocated group, which they used when caring for older patients over at least 3 months. At the end of this period, a sample of older patients aged ≥ 60 years who had been awaiting medical consultation by the participating GPs were interviewed and their prescriptions analysed. The primary outcome was the frequency of PIP in and between the groups. RESULTS: Among 53 GPs who were administered the baseline survey, 14 were included in the clinical trial. At baseline, 146 prescriptions were analysed: the PIP overall was 37.7% (55/146), in the intervention group was 40.6% (28/69), and in the control group was 35.1% (27/77). After the intervention, 284 prescriptions were analysed: the PIP overall was 31.7% (90/284), in the intervention group was 32.2% (46/143), and in the control group was 31.2% (44/141) (RR: 1.16; 95% CI, 0.76-1.76). In the within-group analysis, the PIP reduced from before to after the intervention in both groups-more significantly in the intervention than in the control group (p < 0.001). In the stratified analysis of PIP frequency by GPs, there was a relative risk reduction in 86% (6/7) of GPs in the intervention group compared to 71% (5/7) in the control group. CONCLUSION: We found that the MPI Brasil app effectively reduced PIP, suggesting that it may be useful to incorporate this tool into clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02918643). First registration on 22/09/2016.

[Management of polypharmacy in older people with multimorbidity]. / Management der Polypharmazie bei älteren Menschen mit Multimorbidität.

If the individual diagnoses of older people with multimorbidity are treated according to guidelines and by different specialists, confusing medication plans are sometimes the consequence. Therefore, a regular and structured drug evaluation is essential. As the life goals of patients can be very different, especially in older age, certain preliminary considerations should be made when starting, prescribing or discontinuing medication, taking into account the individual situation, including geriatric aspects. Updated so-called positive and negative lists provide assistance as to which medications are suitable or unsuitable for older people. Discontinuing certain medications when the life expectancy is reduced certainly makes sense but undertreatment of symptoms that cause distress to people, such as pain, should definitely be avoided.

Prescribing and deprescribing in older people with life-limiting illnesses receiving hospice care at the end of life: A longitudinal, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although prescribing and deprescribing practices in older people have been the subject of much research generally, there are limited data in older people at the end of life. This highlights the need for research to determine prescribing and deprescribing patterns, as a first step to facilitate guideline development for medicines optimisation in this vulnerable population. AIMS: To examine prescribing and deprescribing patterns in older people at the end of life and to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication use. DESIGN: A longitudinal, retrospective cohort study where medical records of eligible participants were reviewed, and data extracted. Medication appropriateness was assessed using two sets of consensus-based criteria; the STOPPFrail criteria and criteria developed by Morin et al. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Decedents aged 65 years and older admitted continuously for at least 14 days before death to three inpatient hospice units across Northern Ireland, who died between 1st January and 31st December 2018, and who had a known diagnosis, known cause of death and prescription data. Unexpected/sudden deaths were excluded. RESULTS: Polypharmacy was reported to be continued until death in 96.2% of 106 decedents (mean age of 75.6 years). Most patients received at least one potentially inappropriate medication at the end of life according to the STOPPFrail and the criteria developed by Morin et al. (57.5 and 69.8% respectively). Limited prevalence of proactive deprescribing interventions was observed. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of systematic rationalisation of drug treatments, a substantial proportion of older patients continued to receive potentially inappropriate medication until death.

Assessment of prescribing in under-five paediatric outpatients in Nigeria: an application of the POPI (Pediatrics: Omission of Prescription and Inappropriate Prescription) tool.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated prescribing in children under the age of five attending paediatric outpatient clinics at three Central hospitals in Delta State, Nigeria and determined the conditions mostly associated with inappropriate prescriptions and omissions. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of prescriptions made to children from 0 to 59 months who attended the clinics. Prescriptions were evaluated using the POPI tool, occurrence of potentially inappropriate prescriptions and prescribing omissions were reported as percentages and inappropriate prescription types and prescription omissions were also reported as frequencies. Relationship between inappropriate prescriptions, omissions of prescriptions and age group and gender were determined, P < 0.05 was considered significant. KEY FINDINGS: A total of 1327 prescriptions from the three centres were analyzed. There was a preponderance of infants (>1 month-12 months of age) in the study (43.0%) and a somewhat even gender distribution. Exactly 29.8% of all the prescriptions studied had at least one occurrence of inappropriate prescription. The use of H1 antagonists with sedative or atropine-like effects accounted for the majority of inappropriate prescriptions (49.5%), while the prescription of drinkable amoxicillin or other antibiotics in doses other than mg was the most frequent omission of prescription (97.2%). There was a significant relationship between the occurrence of inappropriate prescription and age group (P > 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate prescriptions and omissions of prescriptions were high and effectively detected by the POPI tool.

Tools and guidelines to assess the appropriateness of medication and aid deprescribing: An umbrella review.

AIMS: The aim of this umbrella review was to identify tools and guidelines to aid the deprescribing process of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), evaluate development and validation methods, and describe evidence levels for medication inclusion. METHODS: Searches were conducted on MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase.com, Cochrane CDSR, CINAHL (EBSCO), Web of Science Core Collection and guideline databases from the date of inception to 7 July 2022. Following the initial search, an additional search was conducted to identify an updated versions of tools on 17 July 2023. We analysed the contents of tools and guidelines. RESULTS: From 23 systematic reviews and guidelines, we identified 95 tools (72 explicit, 12 mixed and 11 implicit) and nine guidelines. Most tools (83.2%) were developed to use for older persons, including 14 for those with limited life expectancy. Seven tools were for children <18 years (7.37%). Most explicit/mixed tools (78.57%) and all guidelines were validated. We found 484 PIMs and 202 medications with different appropriateness independent of disease for older persons with normal and limited life expectancy, respectively. Only two tools and eight guidelines reported the evidence level, and a quarter of medications had high-quality evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Tools are available for a diversity of populations. There were discrepancies, with the same medication being classified as inappropriate in some tools and appropriate in others, possibly due to low-quality evidence. In particular, tools for patients with limited life expectancy were developed based on very limited evidence, and research to generate this evidence is urgently needed. Our medication lists, along with the level of evidence, could facilitate efforts to strengthen the evidence.

Inappropriate polypharmacy management versus deprescribing: A review on their relationship.

Medication burden and polypharmacy are highly prevalent among patients with multimorbidity. There have been multiple initiatives to overcome polypharmacy and medication burden in patients with multimorbidity. These initiatives have evolved over time as effective in reducing the negative health consequences of polypharmacy. In recent years, the concept and practice of deprescribing has emerged and gained popularity as an efficient comprehensive approach to manage polypharmacy and ultimately improve health outcomes. Clinicians and researchers with interest in deprescribing view it as a novel and unique strategy that should be a part of effective prescribing process. However, other traditional polypharmacy management strategies such as drug review and medication therapy management still coexist. It is intriguing if deprescribing is considered as a type of these strategies or not. This narrative mini-review explored published literature in an effort to ascertain the differences and similarities between deprescribing and other prominent polypharmacy management interventions. It is clear that there is an overlap between deprescribing and inappropriate polypharmacy management. This is represented by focusing on multimorbid older adults, using similar explicit and implicit tools and having drug review as the core principle of both approaches. This overlap has probably made deprescribing considered as one of polypharmacy management approaches.

Polypharmacy in chronic kidney disease: Health outcomes & pharmacy-based strategies to mitigate inappropriate polypharmacy.

The rising prevalence of comorbidities in an increasingly aging population has sparked a reciprocal rise in polypharmacy. Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have a greater burden of polypharmacy due to the comorbidities and complications associated with their disease. Polypharmacy in CKD patients has been linked to myriad direct and indirect costs for patients and the society at large. Pharmacists are uniquely positioned within the healthcare team to streamline polypharmacy management in the setting of CKD. In this article, we review the landscape of polypharmacy and examine its impacts through the lens of the ECHO model of Economic, Clinical, and Humanistic Outcomes. We also present strategies for healthcare teams to improve polypharmacy care through comprehensive medication management process that includes medication reconciliation during transitions of care, medication therapy management, and deprescribing. These pharmacist-led interventions have the potential to mitigate adverse outcomes associated with polypharmacy in CKD.

Comparison of antibiotic prescribing between physicians and advanced practice clinicians.

We compared antibiotic prescribing rates for respiratory conditions in a national sample of outpatient visits from 2010 to 2018 between physicians and advanced practice clinicians (APCs). APCs prescribed antibiotics more frequently than physicians (58% vs 52%), but there were no differences in selection of guideline recommended first-line agents between specialties.