RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Frailty and adverse drug effects are linked in the fact that polypharmacy is correlated with the severity of frailty; however, a causal relation has not been proven in older people with clinically manifest frailty. METHODS: A literature search was performed in Medline to detect prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing the effects of pharmacological interventions or medication optimization in older frail adults on comprehensive frailty scores or partial aspects of frailty that were published from January 1998 to October 2019. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were identified, 4 on comprehensive frailty scores and 21 on aspects of frailty. Two trials on comprehensive frailty scores showed positive results on frailty although the contribution of medication review in a multidimensional approach was unclear. In the studies on aspects related to frailty, ten individual drug interventions showed improvement in physical performance, muscle strength or body composition utilizing alfacalcidol, teriparatide, piroxicam, testosterone, recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin, or capromorelin. There were no studies examining negative effects of drugs on frailty. CONCLUSION: So far, data on a causal relationship between drugs and frailty are inconclusive or related to single-drug interventions on partial aspects of frailty. There is a clear need for RCTs on this topic that should be based on a comprehensive, internationally consistent and thus reproducible concept of frailty assessment.
Assuntos
Fragilidade/tratamento farmacológico , Idoso , Idoso Fragilizado , Humanos , Polimedicação , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como AssuntoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals are often reluctant to deprescribe fall-risk-increasing drugs (FRIDs). Lack of knowledge and skills form a significant barrier and furthermore, there is no consensus on which medications are considered as FRIDs despite several systematic reviews. To support clinicians in the management of FRIDs and to facilitate the deprescribing process, STOPPFall (Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in older adults with high fall risk) and a deprescribing tool were developed by a European expert group. METHODS: STOPPFall was created by two facilitators based on evidence from recent meta-analyses and national fall prevention guidelines in Europe. Twenty-four panellists chose their level of agreement on a Likert scale with the items in the STOPPFall in three Delphi panel rounds. A threshold of 70% was selected for consensus a priori. The panellists were asked whether some agents are more fall-risk-increasing than others within the same pharmacological class. In an additional questionnaire, panellists were asked in which cases deprescribing of FRIDs should be considered and how it should be performed. RESULTS: The panellists agreed on 14 medication classes to be included in the STOPPFall. They were mostly psychotropic medications. The panellists indicated 18 differences between pharmacological subclasses with regard to fall-risk-increasing properties. Practical deprescribing guidance was developed for STOPPFall medication classes. CONCLUSION: STOPPFall was created using an expert Delphi consensus process and combined with a practical deprescribing tool designed to optimise medication review. The effectiveness of these tools in falls prevention should be further evaluated in intervention studies.
Assuntos
Acidentes por Quedas , Preparações Farmacêuticas , Acidentes por Quedas/prevenção & controle , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Técnica Delphi , Europa (Continente) , Humanos , PrescriçõesRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Multi-morbidity and polypharmacy increase the risk of non-trivial adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in older people during hospitalization. Despite this, there are no established interventions for hospital-acquired ADR prevention. METHODS: We undertook a pragmatic, multi-national, parallel arm prospective randomized open-label, blinded endpoint (PROBE) controlled trial enrolling patients at six European medical centres. We randomized 1,537 older medical and surgical patients with multi-morbidity and polypharmacy on admission in a 1:1 ratio to SENATOR software-guided medication optimization plus standard care (intervention, n = 772, mean number of daily medications = 9.34) or standard care alone (control, n = 765, mean number of daily medications = 9.23) using block randomization stratified by site and admission type. Attending clinicians in the intervention arm received SENATOR-generated advice at a single time point with recommendations they could choose to adopt or not. The primary endpoint was occurrence of probable or certain ADRs within 14 days of randomization. Secondary endpoints were primary endpoint derivatives; tertiary endpoints included all-cause mortality, re-hospitalization, composite healthcare utilization and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: For the primary endpoint, there was no difference between the intervention and control groups (24.5 vs. 24.8%; OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.77-1.24; P = 0.88). Similarly, with secondary and tertiary endpoints, there were no significant differences. Among attending clinicians in the intervention group, implementation of SENATOR software-generated medication advice points was poor (~15%). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, uptake of software-generated medication advice to minimize ADRs was poor and did not reduce ADR incidence during index hospitalization.
Assuntos
Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos , Polimedicação , Idoso , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/diagnóstico , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/epidemiologia , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/prevenção & controle , Hospitalização , Humanos , Multimorbidade , Estudos Prospectivos , Qualidade de VidaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The aim of this trial is to evaluate the effect of SENATOR software on incident, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in older, multimorbid, hospitalized patients. The SENATOR software produces a report designed to optimize older patients' current prescriptions by applying the published STOPP and START criteria, highlighting drug-drug and drug-disease interactions and providing non-pharmacological recommendations aimed at reducing the risk of incident delirium. METHODS: We will conduct a multinational, pragmatic, parallel arm Prospective Randomized Open-label, Blinded Endpoint (PROBE) controlled trial. Patients with acute illnesses are screened for recruitment within 48 h of arrival to hospital and enrolled if they meet the relevant entry criteria. Participants' medical history, current prescriptions, select laboratory tests, electrocardiogram, cognitive status and functional status are collected and entered into a dedicated trial database. Patients are individually randomized with equal allocation ratio. Randomization is stratified by site and medical versus surgical admission, and uses random block sizes. Patients randomized to either arm receive standard routine pharmaceutical clinical care as it exists in each site. Additionally, in the intervention arm an individualized SENATOR-generated medication advice report based on the participant's clinical and medication data is placed in their medical record and a senior medical staff member is requested to review it and adopt any of its recommendations that they judge appropriate. The trial's primary outcome is the proportion of patients experiencing at least one adjudicated probable or certain, non-trivial ADR, during the index hospitalization, assessed at 14 days post-randomization or at index hospital discharge if it occurs earlier. Potential ADRs are identified retrospectively by the site researchers who complete a Potential Endpoint Form (one per type of event) that is adjudicated by a blinded, expert committee. All occurrences of 12 pre-specified events, which represent the majority of ADRs, are reported to the committee along with other suspected ADRs. Participants are followed up 12 (+/- 4) weeks post-index hospital discharge to assess medication quality and healthcare utilization. This is the first clinical trial to examine the effectiveness of a software intervention on incident ADRs and associated healthcare costs during hospitalization in older people with multi-morbidity and polypharmacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02097654 , 27 March 2014.
Assuntos
Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/epidemiologia , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/prevenção & controle , Hospitalização , Lista de Medicamentos Potencialmente Inapropriados/normas , Software/normas , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudos de Coortes , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/diagnóstico , Feminino , Hospitalização/tendências , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Alta do Paciente/tendências , Polimedicação , Lista de Medicamentos Potencialmente Inapropriados/tendências , Estudos Prospectivos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Software/tendências , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Glaucoma used to be the most common cause for blindness in Iceland. As the incidence of glaucoma increases with age, the patients often have numerous comorbidities and use various medications. It is important to keep in mind interactions and side effects of glaucoma medications when deciding systemic medical treatment for these patients to ensure their safety and comfort. The goal of the study was to gather information about drug use of patients with severe glaucoma. METHODS: A retrospective study where data were collected from 100 consecutive patients who underwent a trabeculectomy as first glaucoma surgery at Landspitali National University Hospital of Iceland during 2013-2017. All systemic and ophthalmic medications during 6 months before and after the surgery, medical diagnoses, age and gender of the patients were registered. RESULTS: Of all 100 patients, 87 used systemic medication, averaging 5.3 drugs/patient. Mean number of glaucoma medication used was 3.0. Mean age at surgery was 75 years and 53 were women. The most common systemic drug class was anti-hypertensives, used by 57 patients where beta-blockers were the most common, used by 30 patients. Zopiclone was the most common single drug, used by 29 patients. CONCLUSION: It is evident that patients with glaucoma take various drugs for systemic illness that can affect their glaucoma and have interactions with glaucoma drugs. It is urgent that healthcare providers keep this in mind when deciding on systemic treatment for patients with glaucoma, with regards to possible interactions with glaucoma drugs and the effect on patient's overall health.
Assuntos
Glaucoma/tratamento farmacológico , Pressão Intraocular/efeitos dos fármacos , Idoso , Comorbidade , Interações Medicamentosas , Feminino , Glaucoma/diagnóstico , Glaucoma/epidemiologia , Glaucoma/fisiopatologia , Humanos , Islândia/epidemiologia , Masculino , Polimedicação , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence and incidence of polypharmacy/hyperpolypharmacy and which medications are most prescribed to patients with varying burden of polypharmacy. DESIGN: Retrospective, population-based cohort study. SETTING: Iceland. PARTICIPANTS: Including patients (≥18 years) admitted to internal medicine services at Landspitali - The National University Hospital of Iceland, between 1 January 2010 with a follow-up of clinical outcomes through 17 March 2022. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Participants were categorised into medication use categories of non-polypharmacy (<5), polypharmacy (5-10) and hyperpolypharmacy (>10) based on the number of medications filled in the year predischarge and postdischarge. The primary outcome was prevalence and incidence of new polypharmacy. Secondary outcomes were mortality, length of hospital stay and re-admission. RESULTS: Among 85 942 admissions (51% male), the median (IQR) age was 73 (60-83) years. The prevalence of preadmission non-polypharmacy was 15.1% (95% CI 14.9 to 15.3), polypharmacy was 22.9% (95% CI 22.6 to 23.2) and hyperpolypharmacy was 62.5% (95% CI 62.2 to 62.9). The incidence of new postdischarge polypharmacy was 33.4% (95% CI 32.9 to 33.9), and for hyperpolypharmacy was 28.9% (95% CI 28.3 to 29.5) for patients with preadmission polypharmacy. Patients with a higher level of medication use were more likely to use multidose drug dispensing and have a diagnosis of adverse drug reaction. Other comorbidities, including responsible subspeciality and estimates of comorbidity and frailty burden, were identical between groups of varying polypharmacy. There was no difference in length of stay, re-admission rate and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Preadmission polypharmacy/hyperpolypharmacy and postdischarge new polypharmacy/hyperpolypharmacy is common amongst patients admitted to internal medicine. A higher level of medication use category was not found to be associated with demographic, comorbidity and clinical outcomes. Medications that are frequently inappropriately prescribed were among the most prescribed medications in the group. An increased focus on optimising medication usage is needed after hospital admission. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05756400.
Assuntos
Assistência ao Convalescente , Polimedicação , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos de Coortes , Alta do Paciente , Estudos Retrospectivos , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: With the aging of the population and the increase in chronic diseases, there is an inherent risk of polypharmacy and inappropriate medication use. The study aimed to determine the prevalence and incidence of potentially inappropriate medication use and its correlation with polypharmacy. METHODS: A retrospective, population-based cohort study among patients ≥65 years hospitalized at The National University Hospital of Iceland from 2010-2020. Data on medication usage were retrieved from the National Prescription Medicine Registry. Based on the number of medications filled in in the year prior to admission and post-discharge, participants were categorized non-polypharmacy (<5), polypharmacy (5-9), and hyper-polypharmacy (≥10). The prevalence and incidence of potentially inappropriate medication use was assessed based on the 2019 Beers criteria. Regression models were used to correlate sociodemographic, clinical, and pharmacoepidemiologic variables and the odds of new potentially inappropriate medication use. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 55,859 patients (48.5% male) with a median [IQR] age of 80 [73-86] years. The prevalence of inappropriate medication use in the year preceding admission was 34.0%, 77.7%, and 96.4% for patients with non-polypharmacy, polypharmacy, and hyper-polypharmacy. The incidence of new potentially inappropriate medication use was 46.7% (95% CI 45.6%-47.6%) among those with no potentially inappropriate medication use pre-admission. Factors associated with higher odds of new potentially inappropriate medication use after discharge were the use of multi-dose dispensing services, dementia, polypharmacy, and hyper-polypharmacy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: An increased emphasis is needed to review and reevaluate the appropriateness of medication use among older population in internal medicine. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05756400.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality, especially in older people. Older people with diabetes mellitus may be at especially high risk of ADRs but this risk has not been well studied. This study aimed to compare severity and type of ADRs in hospitalised, multimorbid older people with and without diabetes and secondly to assess the impact of ADRs on mortality, rehospitalisation and length of stay. METHODS: Participants in the SENATOR (Software Engine for the Assessment and optimization of drug and non-drug Therapy in Older peRsons) trial were assessed for 12 common and 'other' prevalent and incident adverse drug reactions using a blinded end-point adjudication process. Descriptive analyses, logistic regression and mediation analyses were undertaken. RESULTS: Of 1537 people in the SENATOR trial, 540 (35.1%) had diabetes mellitus (mean age 77.4 ± 7.3 years, 58.5% male). In the total population, 773 prevalent and 828 incident ADRs were reported. Both prevalent and incident symptomatic hypoglycaemia and incident acute kidney injury (AKI) were significantly more common in people with diabetes (p < 0.05). Patients with diabetes had higher all-cause mortality at 12 weeks than those without (9.1% vs 6.3%, p = 0.04). Mediation analysis revealed that mortality was significantly higher (OR = 1.43, Sobel test p = 0.048) in people with diabetes and ADRs causing AKI. CONCLUSIONS: Older multimorbid people with diabetes presenting to hospital with acute illness have significantly more ADRs than those without, and a significantly higher mortality that is mediated by medication-associated AKI and poorer renal function.
Assuntos
Injúria Renal Aguda , Diabetes Mellitus , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos , Hipoglicemia , Humanos , Masculino , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus/tratamento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiologia , Hipoglicemia/induzido quimicamente , Hipoglicemia/epidemiologia , Multimorbidade , Injúria Renal Aguda/induzido quimicamente , Injúria Renal Aguda/epidemiologiaRESUMO
PURPOSE: Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) are prevalent among multimorbid and polymedicated older adults and can increase the risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), hospital admissions, and mortality. This study describes the incidence and prevalence of 66 clinically relevant DDIs and analyses the occurrence of 12 corresponding predefined ADRs in older inpatients enrolled in the SENATOR trial. METHODS: The sub-study of the SENATOR trial that involved 1537 multimorbid older inpatients, recruited from 2016 to 2018 in six academic teaching hospitals in Belgium, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Scotland, and Spain respectively, and analysed 66 potentially clinically significant DDIs. Descriptive analysis determined DDI and corresponding ADR prevalence/incidence. RESULTS: At baseline (median age: 78 [72, 84], 52.8% male), the prevalence of patients with DDIs was high (50.9%), increased during hospitalisation (55.2%) and reduced to 49.7% after 12 weeks. The most common DDIs were: ≥ 2 potassium reducing drugs (17.1%), ≥ 3 centrally acting drugs (9.0%), and SSRI + loop/thiazide diuretic (7.2%). Of all participants, one-third experienced a prevalent (36.6%)/incident (35.8%) ADR. Major serum electrolyte disturbance had the highest incidence (10.7%)/prevalence (11.5%). Incident ADRs were more common in patients with DDIs (p = 0.013). A higher prevalence of new onset falls (p = 0.013), major constipation (p = 0.004), and major serum electrolyte disturbances (p = 0.006) was observed in patients with related and thus potentially causal DDIs. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should, be aware of DDIs and the involved drug classes that can lead to an increased rate of ADRs in older multimorbid inpatients. Regularly reevaluating the appropriateness of the frequently prescribed drug classes and initiating judicious deprescribing is recommended.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Older adults with dementia commonly receive multiple medications and have higher hospitalization rates, elevating the risk of potentially inappropriate prescribing and in-hospital adverse drug reactions (ADRs). There is limited evidence examining ADRs in older adults with dementia during hospitalization. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to assess the association between dementia and incidence of ADRs during hospitalization and to identify prevalent types of ADRs and medications linked to ADRs. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of the SENATOR trial database, which was a randomized controlled trial of an intervention to reduce ADRs in older inpatients with multimorbidity. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1537 patients (47.2% females) with a mean age of 78.1 years were recruited from 6 European hospitals. METHODS: Sociodemographic data, functional status, cognitive status, clinical information, and ADR-related outcomes were extracted from the SENATOR database. Inpatients with dementia were identified based on prior International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10), dementia diagnosis, receiving acetylcholinesterase inhibitors or memantine, or a Mini-Mental State Examination score ≤24 at admission without concurrent delirium. RESULTS: Among participants, 392 (25.5%) were identified as having dementia. The proportion of patients with probable or certain incident in-hospital ADRs was similar between the groups with and without dementia (22.4% vs 25.4%, P > .05). However, in-hospital rates of probable or certain ADRs from 12 common categories were less frequently identified in patients with dementia compared to those without (19.4% vs 23%, P = .025). Major constipation (6.4% vs 9.9%, P = .03) and acute dyspepsia, nausea, or vomiting (2.8% vs 5%, P = .03) were less commonly observed ADRs in patients with dementia. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: We did not observe an increased risk of in-hospital ADRs among inpatients with dementia. However, ADRs related to the gastrointestinal tract and identified by subjective symptoms were less frequently identified in this group. This study lays the groundwork for developing new tools for ADR diagnosis for older patients with dementia.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Older women experience more adverse drug reactions (ADRs) than older men. However, the underlying basis for this sex difference is unclear. Sex (biological status) and/or gender (sociocultural constructs) influences on patterns of inappropriate prescribing in multimorbid older adults may be one reason for this ADR sex difference. In this secondary analysis, we examined whether incident ADR sex differences could be related to concurrent sex differences in potentially inappropriate prescribing. DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective secondary analysis of sex differences in the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), potential prescribing omissions (PPOs), and ADRs among the 1537 participants (47.2% female, median [IQR] age 78 [72-84] years) was undertaken in the SENATOR clinical trial database, conducted in six large European medical centers. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: We looked specifically for male/female differences relating to PIMs and PPOs (defined by STOPP/START version 2 criteria) identified within 48 h of acute hospitalization. We also assessed sex differences for ADRs identified at 14 days from admission or discharge, whichever came first. ADRs were assessed by blinded endpoint adjudication panel consensus. RESULTS: During hospitalization, significantly more females experienced ≥1 ADR compared to males (28% and 21%, respectively; odds ratio 1.40, 95% CI 1.10-1.78, p < 0.005). Nine of the 11 STOPP-criteria PIMs showing a significant sex difference occurred more often in females. Of the four START-criteria PPOs showing a significant sex difference, all occurred more often in females. Some sex-associated PIMs reflect higher prevalence of related conditions in older women. CONCLUSION: We conclude that specific STOPP-criteria PIMs and START-criteria PPOs were identified more frequently in older women than older men during acute hospitalization, possibly contributing to higher ADR incidence in older women. Prescribers should appreciate sex differences in exposure to potentially inappropriate prescribing and ADR risk, given the preponderance of older women over older men in most clinical settings.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Most studies on patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) require confirmation of an infiltrate by chest radiography, but in practice admissions are common among patients with symptoms of pneumonia without an infiltrate (SPWI). The aim of this research was to compare clinical characteristics, microbial etiology, and outcomes among patients with CAP and SPWI. METHODS: Adults suspected of CAP were prospectively recruited at Landspitali University Hospital over a 1-year period, 2018 to 2019. The study was population based. Those admitted with two or more of the following symptoms were invited to participate: temperature ≥38°C or ≤36°C, sweating, shaking/chills, chest pain, a new cough, or new onset of dyspnea. Primary outcome was mortality at 30 days and one year. RESULTS: Six hundred twenty-five cases were included, 409 with CAP and 216 with SPWI; median age was 75 (interquartile range [IQR] 64-84) and 315 (50.4%) were females. Patients with CAP were more likely to have fever (≥38.0°C) (66.9% [273/408]) vs. 49.3% (106/215), p < 0.001), a higher CRP (median 103 [IQR 34-205] vs. 55 (IQR 17-103), p < 0.001), identification of Streptococcus pneumoniae (18.0% [64/355]) vs. 6.3% (10/159) of tested, p = 0.002) and to receive antibacterial treatment (99.5% [407/409]) vs. 87.5% (189/216), p < 0.001) but less likely to have a respiratory virus detected (25.4% [33/130]) vs. 51.2% (43/84) of tested, p < 0.001). The adjusted odds ratios for 30-day and 1 year mortality of SPWI compared to CAP were 0.86 (95% CI 0.40-1.86) and 1.46 (95% CI 0.92-2.32), respectively. DISCUSSION: SPWI is a common cause of hospitalization and despite having fever less frequently, lower inflammatory markers, and lower detection rate of pneumococci than patients with CAP, mortality is not significantly different.
Assuntos
Infecções Comunitárias Adquiridas , Pneumonia , Vírus , Feminino , Humanos , Adulto , Idoso , Masculino , Pneumonia/diagnóstico por imagem , Pneumonia/epidemiologia , Radiografia , Streptococcus pneumoniae , Infecções Comunitárias Adquiridas/diagnóstico por imagem , Infecções Comunitárias Adquiridas/epidemiologia , HospitalizaçãoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of preoperative polypharmacy and the incidence of postoperative polypharmacy/hyper-polypharmacy in surgical patients and their association with adverse outcomes. METHODS: This was a retrospective, population-based cohort study among patients older than or equal to 18 years undergoing surgery at a university hospital between 2005 and 2018. Patients were categorized based on the number of medications: non-polypharmacy (fewer than 5); polypharmacy (5-9); and hyper-polypharmacy (greater than or equal to 10). The 30-day mortality, prolonged hospitalization (greater than or equal to 10 days), and incidence of readmission were compared between medication-use categories. RESULTS: Among 55 997 patients, the prevalence of preoperative polypharmacy was 32.3 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 33.5 to 34.3) and the prevalence of hyper-polypharmacy was 25.5 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 25.2 to 25.9). Thirty-day mortality was higher for patients exposed to preoperative hyper-polypharmacy (2.3 per cent) and preoperative polypharmacy (0.8 per cent) compared with those exposed to non-polypharmacy (0.6 per cent) (P < 0.001). The hazards ratio (HR) of long-term mortality was higher for patients exposed to hyper-polypharmacy (HR 1.32 (95 per cent c.i. 1.25 to 1.40)) and polypharmacy (HR 1.07 (95 per cent c.i. 1.01 to 1.14)) after adjustment for patient and procedural variables. The incidence of longer hospitalization (greater than or equal to 10 days) was higher for hyper-polypharmacy (11.3 per cent) and polypharmacy (6.3 per cent) compared with non-polypharmacy (4.1 per cent) (P < 0.001). The 30-day incidence of readmission was higher for patients exposed to hyper-polypharmacy (10.2 per cent) compared with polypharmacy (6.1 per cent) and non-polypharmacy (4.8 per cent) (P < 0.001). Among patients not exposed to polypharmacy, the incidence of new postoperative polypharmacy/hyper-polypharmacy was 33.4 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 32.8 to 34.1), and, for patients exposed to preoperative polypharmacy, the incidence of postoperative hyper-polypharmacy was 16.3 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 16.0 to 16.7). CONCLUSION: Preoperative polypharmacy and new postoperative polypharmacy/hyper-polypharmacy are common and associated with adverse outcomes. This highlights the need for increased emphasis on optimizing medication usage throughout the perioperative interval. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04805151 (http://clinicaltrials.gov).
Assuntos
Hospitalização , Polimedicação , Humanos , Estudos de Coortes , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
PURPOSE: STOPP/START is a physiological systems-based explicit set of criteria that attempts to define the clinically important prescribing problems relating to potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs-STOPP criteria) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs-START criteria). The previous two versions of STOPP/START criteria were published in 2008 and 2015. The present study describes the revised and updated third version of the criteria. METHODS: A detailed system-by-system review of the published literature from April 2014 to March 2022 was undertaken with the aim of including clinically important new explicit PIM and PPO criteria and removing any criteria considered to be no longer correct or outdated. A panel of 11 academic physicians with recognized expertise in geriatric pharmacotherapy from 8 European countries participated in a Delphi panel with the task of validating the draft criteria. The panel was presented with the draft new criteria using the SurveyMonkey® on-line platform in which panelists were asked to indicate their level of agreement on a five-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Two hundred and four evidence-based draft criteria (one hundred and forty-five STOPP criteria, fifty-nine START criteria) were presented to panelists for assessment using the Delphi validation method. Over the course of four rounds of Delphi validation, the panel achieved consensus on 133 STOPP criteria and 57 START criteria, i.e., 190 STOPP/START criteria in total representing a 66.7% increase in the number of criteria compared to STOPP/START version 2 published in 2015. CONCLUSION: A fully revised and updated version of STOPP/START criteria has been validated by a European expert panel using the Delphi consensus process.
Assuntos
Prescrição Inadequada , Lista de Medicamentos Potencialmente Inapropriados , Humanos , Idoso , Prescrição Inadequada/prevenção & controle , Padrões de Prática Médica , Europa (Continente) , Prescrições de MedicamentosRESUMO
Inappropriate polypharmacy is highly prevalent among older adults and presents a significant healthcare concern. Conducting medication reviews and implementing deprescribing strategies in multimorbid older adults with polypharmacy are an inherently complex and challenging task. Recognizing this, the Special Interest Group on Pharmacology of the European Geriatric Medicine Society has compiled evidence on medication review and deprescribing in older adults and has formulated recommendations to enhance appropriate prescribing practices. The current evidence supports the need for a comprehensive and widespread transformation in education, guidelines, research, advocacy, and policy to improve the management of polypharmacy in older individuals. Furthermore, incorporating deprescribing as a routine aspect of care for the ageing population is crucial. We emphasize the importance of involving geriatricians and experts in geriatric pharmacology in driving, and actively participating in this transformative process. By doing so, we can work towards achieving optimal medication use and enhancing the well-being of older adults in the generations to come.
Assuntos
Desprescrições , Geriatria , Prescrição Inadequada , Idoso , Humanos , Prescrição Inadequada/prevenção & controle , Multimorbidade , PolimedicaçãoRESUMO
PURPOSE: To provide an overview of the current deprescribing attitudes, practices, and approaches of geriatricians and geriatricians-in-training across Europe. METHODS: An online survey was disseminated among European geriatricians and geriatricians-in-training. The survey comprised Likert scale and multiple-choice questions on deprescribing approaches and practices, deprescribing education and knowledge, and facilitators/barriers of deprescribing. Responses to the survey questions and participant characteristics were quantified and differences evaluated between geriatricians and geriatricians-in-training and between European regions. RESULTS: The 964 respondents (median age 42 years old; 64% female; 21% geriatricians-in-training) were generally willing to deprescribe (98%) and felt confident about deprescribing (85%). Despite differences across European regions, the most commonly reported reasons for deprescribing were functional impairment and occurrence of adverse drug reactions. The most important barriers for deprescribing were patients' unwillingness, fear of negative consequences, lack of time, and poor communication between multiple prescribers. Perceived risk of adverse drug reactions was highest for psychotropic drugs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, cardiovascular drugs, and opioid analgesics. Only one in four respondents (23% of geriatricians and 37% of geriatricians-in-training) think education in medical school had sufficiently prepared them for deprescribing in clinical practice. They reported that their future deprescribing activities would probably increase with improved information sharing between various prescribers, deprescribing recommendations in guidelines, and increased education and training. Approximately 90% think that a paradigm shift is required for prescribers and patients, increasing focus on the possible benefits of deprescribing (potentially) inappropriate medications. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the outcomes of this survey, we recommend investing in improved inter-professional communication, better education and evidence-based recommendations to improve future patient-centered deprescribing practices.