Impact of palliative care at end-of-life Covid-19 patients - a small-scale pioneering experience.

BACKGROUND: In March 2020, the outbreak caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus was declared a pandemic, resulting in numerous fatalities worldwide. To effectively combat the virus, it would be beneficial to involve professionals who specialize in symptom control for advanced illnesses, working closely with other specialties throughout the illness process. This approach can help manage a range of symptoms, from mild to severe and potentially life-threatening. No studies have been conducted in Portugal to analyse the intervention of Palliative Medicine at the end of life of Covid-19 patients and how it differs from other specialties. This knowledge could help determine the importance of including it in the care of people with advanced Covid-19. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to examine potential differences in the care provided to patients with Covid-19 during their Last Hours and Days of Life (LHDOL) between those who received care from Palliative Medicine doctors and those who did not. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study spanning three months (Dec 2020 to Feb 2021), the duration of the Support Unit especially created to deal with Covid-19 patients. The database included clinical files from 181 patients admitted to the Support Unit, 27 of which died from Covid-19. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were identified in the care provided. Specifically, fewer drugs were administered at the time of death, including drugs for dyspnoea, pain and agitation, suspension of futile devices and use of palliative sedation to control refractory symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: End-of-life care and symptomatic control differ when there's regular follow-up by Palliative Medicine, which may translate less symptomatic suffering and promote a dignified and humane end of life.

Pharmacist-independent prescriber deprescribing in UK care homes: Contextual factors associated with increased activity.

AIMS: The Care Home Independent Pharmacist Prescriber Study (CHIPPS) process evaluation hypothesized that contextual factors influenced the likelihood of deprescribing by pharmacist-independent prescribers. The aim of this paper is to test this hypothesis. METHODS: From CHIPPS study data, medications deprescribed totalled 284 for 370 residents in UK care homes. Regression analysis was used to describe the relationship between the number of medicines stopped and contextual factors (number of residents cared for, pharmacist employment within associated medical practice, previous care home experience, hours active within trial, years' experience as a pharmacist and as a prescriber). RESULTS: Number of residents and pharmacist-independent prescriber employment within a medical practice were positive predictors of deprescribing. CONCLUSION: Previous experiences were not related to deprescribing likelihood. Increasing the number of residents increases the opportunity for deprescribing and therefore this relationship is intuitive. The location within a medical practice is an interesting finding that requires further exploration to understand its exact nature.

Patient-reported experience measures in deprescribing for hospitalised older patients: a prospective, multicentre, observational study.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalisation provides an opportunity for medication review and deprescribing. Patient-reported experience measures (PREM) for deprescribing in older patients in hospital are not well described. AIMS: To pilot test and describe PREM for deprescribing in older patients, compare PREM by patient characteristics and investigate patients' awareness of medication changes on hospital discharge. METHODS: This prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study at two tertiary hospitals in Sydney, Australia, evaluated the PREM questionnaire developed by the NSW Therapeutic Advisory Group. It was completed by patients (or their next of kin) recruited from acute geriatric medicine and orthogeriatric services. Association with nine patient characteristics was analysed using the Chi-squared test and multivariable regression. Awareness of medication changes and test-retest reliability were analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Overall, 201 participants completed the questionnaire, with 170 eligible for analysis; 34 (20%) of 170 were aware of reduction or cessation of their usual medications on discharge and reported involvement in decision-making and receiving enough information to reduce or stop one or more of their usual medications (positive PREM). Independent predictors of positive PREM included respondent (next of kin), hospital (Hospital 1), language (English) and specialty (acute geriatric medicine). Overall, 92 (59.4%) of 155 patients with medication changes were aware of those changes on hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: These PREM are a feasible tool to examine older patients' experiences of deprescribing in hospital and might be applied to evaluate interventions to improve awareness, shared decision-making and provision of information when deprescribing for older patients.

Drug landscape in patients receiving general outpatient palliative care in Germany: results from a retrospective analysis of 10,464 patients.

BACKGROUND: According to § 27 and § 87 1b of the German Social Code, Book V, general outpatient palliative care (GOPC) aims to promote, maintain, and improve the quality of life and self-determination of seriously ill people. It should enable them to live in dignity until death in their preferred environment. Instead of a curative approach GOPC treatment focuses on the multiprofessional objective of alleviating symptoms and suffering on a case-by-case basis using medication or other measures, as well as the management of an individual treatment plan. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate to what extent medication differs from 12 months prior GOPC treatment within 12 months following GOPC treatment. METHODS: A retrospective database cross sectional study based on the IQVIA Disease Analyzer (DA) was performed, including adult patients with cancer diagnosis and at least one documentation of palliative support between January 1st, 2018 and December 31st, 2021, in 805 general practices (GP). RESULTS: The results of this study show, that in the context of general general outpatient palliative care, there is a significant increase in the prescription of opioids (18.3% vs. 37.7%), sedatives (7.8% vs. 16.2%) and antiemetics (5.3% vs. 9.7%), as well as a significant reduction in other medications such as statins (21.4% vs. 11.5%), proton pump inhibitors (PPI) (41.2% vs. 35.3%), or antihypertensives (57.5% vs. 46.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the role of GOPC as an important element in improving pharmacological symptom control and deprescription to improve quality of life of patients at the end of their life.

Proton Pump Inhibitor Deprescription Prospective Study in Patients Without Indication: Are There Differences in Proportion of Restarts According to Withdrawal Strategy?

Background: The increasing utilization of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in patients without clear medical indications has raised concerns regarding potential risks, highlighting the importance of deprescription. However, comparative analyses of withdrawal strategies (abrupt vs gradual) in this context remain scarce or of low quality. Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the success rate of deprescribing PPIs in hospitalized patients without a documented indication and compare the proportion of treatment restarts based on withdrawal strategy. Method: An uncontrolled, open-label prospective observational study was conducted on patients receiving PPI treatment during hospital admission between May 2017 and July 2018. Deprescription was recommended for patients without a clear indication. Follow-up continued until discharge, with monitoring for rebound symptoms. The percentage of restarts based on the withdrawal strategy was compared using the chi-square test. Results: A total of 402 patients were reviewed, among whom 27% lacked a medical indication (mean age > 60 years, polymedicated), while 70% were prescribed PPIs electronically. Deprescription was performed in 49% of patients, with 64% undergoing abrupt withdrawal. Rebound symptoms led to treatment restart in 15% of cases. However, the chi-square test revealed no significant differences in restart proportions between the abrupt and gradual withdrawal groups (P = 0.365). Conclusion: Deprescribing PPIs is deemed safe, particularly for polymedicated geriatric patients, as it leads to a low percentage of restarts regardless of the chosen withdrawal strategy. However, the high percentage of PPI prescription without a clear indication underlines the need for periodic reassessment to avoid unnecessary risks and overuse.

"Skills for pills": The dialectical-behavioural therapy skills training reduces polypharmacy in borderline personality disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Polypharmacy and overprescription of off-label medications are common in patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD). The aim of the present naturalistic study was to explore whether the skills training module of dialectical-behavioural therapy (DBT) can reduce polypharmacy in these patients in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Retrospective, observational study of 377 patients with a primary diagnosis of BPD consecutively admitted to the BPD outpatient unit from 2010 through 2020. All patients were invited to participate in the DBT skills training module (DBT-ST). DBT-ST participants (n = 182) were compared with a control group who did not participate in DBT-ST (n = 195). Pre-post intervention changes in medication load and use of antidepressants, benzodiazepines, mood stabilizers, and antipsychotics were evaluated. RESULTS: At baseline, most patients (84.4%) were taking at least one medication and 46.9% were on polypharmacy. Compared to controls, patients in the DBT-ST group presented a significant reduction in the number of medications (2.67-1.95 vs. 2.16-2.19; p < 0.001), medication load (4.25-3.05 vs. 3.45-3.48; p < 0.001), use of benzodiazepines (54.4%-27.5% vs. 40%-40.5%; p < 0.001), mood stabilizers (43.4%-33% vs. 36.4%-39.5%; p < 0.001), and antipsychotics (36.3%-29.1% vs. 34.4%-36.9%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that patients with BPD can benefit from the DBT-ST module, which may reduce the medication load, particularly of sedatives. The results suggest that DBT-ST may be useful to treat overmedication in patients with BPD and could help to promote "deprescription" in clinical practice.

Decision-support systems for managing polypharmacy in the elderly: A scoping review.

Polypharmacy, the consuming of more than five drugs, is a public health problem. It can lead to many interactions and adverse drug reactions and is very expensive. Therapeutic guidelines for managing polypharmacy in the elderly have been issued, but are highly complex, limiting their use. Decision-support systems have therefore been developed to automate the execution of these guidelines, or to provide information about drugs adapted to the context of polypharmacy. These systems differ widely in terms of their technical design, knowledge sources and evaluation methods. We present here a scoping review of electronic systems for supporting the management, by healthcare providers, of polypharmacy in elderly patients. Most existing reviews have focused mainly on evaluation results, whereas the present review also describes the technical design of these systems and the methodologies for developing and evaluating them. A systematic bibliographic search identified 19 systems differing considerably in terms of their technical design (rule-based systems, documentary approach, mixed); outputs (textual report, alerts and/or visual approaches); and evaluations (impact on clinical practices, impact on patient outcomes, efficiency and/or user satisfaction). The evaluations performed are minimal (among all the systems identified, only one system has been evaluated according to all the criteria mentioned above) and no machine learning systems and/or conflict management systems were retrieved. This review highlights the need to develop new methodologies, combining various approaches for decision support system in polypharmacy.

[Deprescription in old people: It's time to take action]. / Deprescripción en personas mayores: es el momento de pasar a la acción.

The use of drugs has undeniable benefits to the elderly, but it is not exempt from undesirable effects. Deprescription is the process of systematic medication review with the target of achieving the best risk-benefit ratio based on the best available evidence. This process is especially important for polymedicated elderly patients as well as those overtreated, frail, terminally ill and at the end of life. The deprescription must be done in stages, establishing a close follow-up in case problems appear after withdrawal. In the decision-making process, it is very important to consider the patient and caregivers opinion, assessing the objectives of the treatment according to the clinical, functional and social situation of the patient. There are multiple tools to make it easier for clinicians to select which drugs to deprescribe (Beers criteria, STOPP-START…). The most susceptible to intervention pharmacological groups are: antihypertensives, antidiabetics, statins, benzodiazepines, antidepressants, anticholinergics, anticholinesterase agents, and neuroleptics.

Proton Pump Inhibitors and the Kidney: Implications of Current Evidence for Clinical Practice and When and How to Deprescribe.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), long thought to be safe, are associated with a number of nonkidney adverse health outcomes and several untoward kidney outcomes, including hypomagnesemia, acute kidney injury, acute interstitial nephritis, incident chronic kidney disease, kidney disease progression, kidney failure, and increased risk for all-cause mortality and mortality due to chronic kidney disease. PPIs are abundantly prescribed, rarely deprescribed, and frequently purchased over the counter. They are frequently used without medical indication, and when medically indicated, they are often used for much longer than needed. In this In Practice review, we summarize evidence linking PPI use with adverse events in general and adverse kidney outcomes in particular. We review the literature on the association of PPI use and risk for hypomagnesemia, acute kidney injury, acute interstitial nephritis, incident chronic kidney disease, kidney disease progression, end-stage kidney disease, and death. We provide an assessment of how this evidence should inform clinical practice. We review the impact of this evidence on patients' perception of risk, synthesize PPI deprescription literature, and provide our recommendations on how to approach PPI use and deprescription.

Deprescription in elderly: A spotlight on pharmacoeconomic aspect.

Aging is a complex process and many factors in the elderly, especially multiple diseases and related unnecessary drug use, support a deprescription approach to this age group to save money and health cost. In this review, we have searched for studies related to the pharmacoeconomic aspect of this deprescription approach in the elderly. Few studies are available, but they are promising and effective in paving the way for prospective longitudinal studies to assess the role of deprescription in optimizing the drugs prescribed to aged patients in a way that reduces the costs of both drug adverse effects and/or hospitalization. Awareness of deprescription is important not only to society, but also to hospital stuff and individual patients.

Evidence for deprescription in primary care through an umbrella review.

BACKGROUND: There is a high prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescriptions in primary care. This is associated with more frequent adverse events, lower quality of life and more frequent visits to hospital accident & emergency departments. The aim of the present study is to summarise available evidence on the effectiveness of deprescription interventions in primary care, and to describe the barriers and enablers of the process from the point of view of patients and healthcare professionals. METHODS: We designed an umbrella review which includes nine systematic reviews. More than 50% of included studies were performed with adults in primary care. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and analysis. RESULTS: In considering studies of the effectiveness of interventions, it can be observed that the educational component of deprescription procedures is a key factor, whilst procedures tailored towards the patient's situation offer better results. With regards to studies involving healthcare professionals, the main explored areas were the balance between risks and benefits, and the need to improve communication with patients as well as other colleagues involved in patient care. Amongst the identified barriers we found lack of time, inability to access all information, being stuck in a routine, resistance to change and a lack of willingness to question the prescription decisions made by healthcare colleagues. With regards to patients, it is clear that they have worries and doubts. In order to overcome these issues, a good relationship with healthcare professionals and receipt of their support is required during the process. CONCLUSIONS: Optimizing medication through targeted deprescribing is an important part of managing chronic conditions, avoiding adverse effects and improving outcomes. The majority of deprescription interventions in primary care are effective. Good communication between healthcare professionals is a key element for success in the deprescription process.

Continuation versus discontinuation of treatment for severe dementia: randomized, pragmatic, open-label, clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of continuing drug treatment in patients with severe dementia (STOP-DEM).

BACKGROUND: Previous observational studies and clinical trials have shown that cholinesterase inhibitors (with or without memantine) provide benefit for patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease. However, the impact of treatment continuation after progression to severe disease is unknown. The main aim of this study is to evaluate the effect and safety of continuing treatment with ChEIs (with or without memantine) for patients with severe dementia. METHODS: This randomized, pragmatic, open-label clinical trial with blinded evaluators will evaluate the efficacy of continuing drug treatment in patients with advanced dementia. A total of 302 community-dwelling patients with severe dementia, Alzheimer's disease, with or without a coexisting diagnosis of vascular dementia, and a score of 10 or less on the Mini-Mental State Examination who received previous treatment with a cholinesterase inhibitor (with or without memantine) for at least 3 months, will be randomized to continue or discontinue drug treatment. Follow-up will be 12 months or until the primary endpoint is achieved. The primary endpoint is entry into institutional care and progression of disability, defined as a loss of 2 of 4 basic functions, or 6 of 11 instrumental functions, according to the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale at 12 months. The secondary outcomes are patient changes in functional and cognitive state, quality of life, and caregiver burden. DISCUSSION: We expect that the results of our study will allow to identify if there is clinical relevant impact for patients and caregivers between maintaining or halting pharmacological treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was prospectively registered in the REec (2017-000042-22) on May 11 2017 and ID ISRCTN12134230 on February 25 2019.

Implementation of Proton Pump Inhibitor Deprescription Protocol in Geriatric Residents.

BACKGROUND: Deprescribing is a recommended intervention to reduce morbidity and mortality caused by polypharmacy in older residents. However, a lack of definite deprescription guidelines and evidence of clinically meaningful outcomes complicates or precludes the practicality of such an approach. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present pilot study is to establish and implement a stepwise taper protocol that can potentially minimize overuse of proton pump inhibitors in a safe, effective, and feasible manner in the nursing home. METHODS: Proton pump inhibitor dosage was reduced by half every 3 weeks until the lowest dose was reached; thereafter, the frequency was changed to every other day for 3 weeks, if tolerated. Subsequently, histamine receptor antagonists replaced proton pump inhibitors and followed the same deprescription regimen until discontinuation. Patient-specific interventions also included reassessment of therapeutic agents and dosage forms for more tolerable alternatives to facilitate deprescription efforts and minimize gastric ulceration or discomfort. RESULTS: The pilot study enrolled 10 patients (average age 65.6 years, medication burden 16.8 units, and antisecretory duration 37.5 months). Physicians accepted >95% of interventions, and 90% of patients achieved cessation at 12 weeks. Post cessation, none of the patients needed antacid, prokinetic, or antisecretory agents at 4 weeks. Difficulties in order interpretation and transcription among nurses as well as order entry and calculations among pharmacists were noted. CONCLUSIONS: The present pilot study added to the growing body of evidence that gradual deprescription of antisecretory medications is feasible. Nonetheless, the pilot design precludes any conclusions about safety and efficacy of the intervention.

[Facing a dilemma in elderly complex and vulnerable patients: to stop or not to stop prevention?] / Dilemas en la enfermedad crónica avanzada: ¿prevención o desprescripción?

OBJECTIVES: 1-To know the preventive prescription (statin, antiplatelet drugs, bisphosphonates, calcium and vitamin D and Vit B12) of elderly patients previously identified as a CCD (with a complex chronic disease) and ACD (with advanced chronic disease and lifetime expectancy of less than 12 months) who died during 2015. 2-To assess the correct indication of Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPI) to determine potentially avoidable medication. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. LOCATION: Four Primary Health Centres, Castellar del Vallès (Barcelona). PARTICIPANTS: 128 patients, 70 ACD and 58 PCC. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Number of drugs at the time of death from the 6 selected group, deprescription (6 months prior to death due to advanced chronic disease), primary or secondary prevention and inappropriate prescription of PPI. RESULTS: Average age of 85'3 years (10,3). 40% took an antiplatelet drug, avoidable in 60% of the ACD, since they did not present any previous cardiovascular episode. 20% of the patients took statins, in which 48% of the cases were primary prevention. The PPI prescription was 67% with inadequate indication for use in 49% of these cases. 20% took calcium / Vitamin D and 1,6% of the ACD a bisphosphonate. There was a 16% deprescription. CONCLUSIONS: A high percentage of our patients with advanced chronic disease and short life expectancy still continue to take preventive and avoidable treatments, potentially dangerous due to their side effects. There is a need to reflect on what we do with these vulnerable patients.

[Deprescribing to increase people health or when deprescribing could be the best pill]. / Deprescribiendo para mejorar la salud de las personas o cuando deprescribir puede ser la mejor medicina.

The increasing longevity of the population, the increase in morbidity and the consumption of medications have caused that polypharmacy is a priority health problem due to its consequences: increase of adverse effects, pharmacological interactions and favor the functional deterioration of the patient. The clinical situation of the patients changes over time and it is necessary to adjust the medication in each stage, assessing the fragility, the level of dependence and the functional deterioration. Deprescription is complex and requires an adequate clinical and pharmacological formation. In Primary Care lies the greater knowledge of the patient and their environment, and in a shared way with the patient and caregivers, it is necessary to assess which drugs to maintain and which ones to withdraw from a clinical, ethical and social perspective. There are tools to help deprescription that can be useful for Primary Care to facilitate this process and that are detailed in this article.

Intervention to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy for older patients with hip fractures: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is frequently observed in hip fracture patients. Although it is associated with an increased risk of hip fracture, polypharmacy often continues after hip fracture recovery. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy for elderly patients admitted to the hospital for hip fractures. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study to compare the outcomes of patients receiving the intervention (n = 32) with those of patients who received usual care (n = 132). All hip fracture patients aged 65 years or older and prescribed 5 or more medications at admission from January 2015 to December 2016 were included in the study. The intervention consisted of an assessment by internal medicine physicians of the appropriateness of polypharmacy and the de-prescription of any unnecessary medications during the patients' hospital stay. The primary composite outcome was death or the first occurrence of any new fracture. Comparisons between the intervention and usual care groups were analyzed using binary logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 164 patients were included in the study. The mean patient age was 84.8 years, and the mean numbers of prescribed medications and potentially inappropriate medications at admission were 8.0 and 1.3, respectively. The mean follow-up period was 8.0 months. The primary composite outcome occurred in 35 (21.3%) patients. The total number of potentially inappropriate medications at discharge was significantly lower in the intervention group than in the usual care group (0.8 ± 0.8 for the intervention group vs 1.1 ± 1.0 for the usual care group; p = 0.03). However, no significant differences in the primary composite outcome were found between the intervention and usual care groups (7 in the intervention group and 28 in the usual care group, odds ratio 1.04, 95% CI 0.41-2.65; p = 1.00). CONCLUSIONS: The intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy was associated with a reduction in potentially inappropriate medications but not an improvement in clinical outcomes. This intervention, which focused only on polypharmacy, may not effectively improve outcomes for elderly patients with hip fractures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN-CTR UMIN000025495 . Retrospectively registered 2 January 2017.

Anti-dementia drugs: what is the evidence in advanced stages?

Dementia is a major public health concern due to its increasing prevalence, substantial caregiver burden, and high financial costs. Currently, the anti-dementia drugs aim only at a symptomatic effect. The subject of prescribing these drugs in advanced stages is a matter of considerable debate, with different countries making distinct recommendations. In this review article, we analyzed the evidence regarding cognitive and functional outcomes, adverse events, health-related costs, and caregiver burden in patients with advanced Alzheimer disease (AD) and mixed dementia. We included 35 studies. Most studies are heterogeneous, focus exclusively on AD, and show small benefits in terms of cognitive and functional scales. The overall evidence seems to suggest a benefit in introducing or maintaining anti-dementia drugs in patients with advanced dementia, but clinical meaningfulness is difficult to ascertain. The issue of costs and caregiver burden is significantly underexplored in this field but also seems to favor treatment continuation, despite a reduced overall effect. The decision of introducing or withdrawing anti-dementia drugs in advanced stages of dementia should be individualized. Future studies with homogeneous designs and outcomes are warranted.

Barriers and Enablers for Deprescribing Glucose-Lowering Treatment in Older Adults: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: Overtreatment with glucose-lowering treatment (GLT) is frequent and a source of high morbidity and mortality in older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study aimed to identify and synthesize barriers and enablers for deprescribing GLT in older adults (≥65 years) with T2DM. DESIGN: Systematic review of qualitative and mixed-methods studies. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Older adults with T2DM, any participants [patients, health care providers (HCPs), caregivers], any settings. METHODS: Two researchers (and a referred third researcher at all stages) independently screened original articles reporting qualitative and mixed-methods studies exploring barriers and enablers for deprescribing GLT in older adults published during 2010-2023, identified from MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and gray literature. Quality of the included studies was assessed with the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool. Verbatim statements on barriers and enablers were extracted, and determinants of behaviors were identified with the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) version 2, and related intervention functions (targets for future interventions) were proposed according to the Behavior Change Wheel (BCW). RESULTS: We identified only 4 studies from 2 countries (United States and the Netherlands), all recently published (2019-2023), that primarily reported barriers to GLT deprescribing from interviews or focus groups of patients or HCPs practicing outpatient medicine. Knowledge, fear, poor communication, inertia, and trust with HCPs were the main determinants of behaviors that influenced deprescribing, and education, training, persuasion and environmental restructuring were the main intervention functions for proposing future interventions. Studies did not cover financial aspects, physician characteristics, or caregiver and family viewpoints. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The use of a behavioral theory and a validated implementation framework provided a comprehensive approach to identifying barriers and enablers for deprescribing GLT in older adults (≥65 years) with T2DM. The behavioral determinants identified may be useful in tailoring interventions to improve the implementation of GLT deprescribing in older adults in ambulatory settings.

An Internationally Derived Process of Healthcare Professionals' Proactive Deprescribing Steps and Constituent Activities.

Proactive deprescribing is the process of tapering or stopping a medicine before harm occurs. This study aimed to specify and validate, with an international sample of healthcare professionals, a proactive deprescribing process of steps and constituent activities. We developed a proactive deprescribing process framework of steps which we populated with literature-derived activities required to be undertaken by healthcare professionals. We distributed a survey to healthcare professionals internationally, requesting for each activity the frequency of its occurrence in practice and whether it was important. Extended response questions investigated barriers and enablers to deprescribing. The 263 survey respondents were from 25 countries. A proactive deprescribing process was developed comprising four steps: (1) identify a patient for potential stop of a medicine, (2) evaluate a patient for potential stop of a medicine, (3) stop a medicine(s), and (4) monitor after a medicine has been stopped, and 17 activities. All activities were considered important by ≥70% of respondents. Nine activities required healthcare professionals to undertake in direct partnership with the patient and/or caregiver, of which seven were only sometimes undertaken. Deprescribing interventions should include a focus on addressing the barriers and enablers of healthcare professionals undertaking the activities that require direct partnership with the patient and/or caregiver.

Deprescribing: An umbrella review.

This umbrella review examined systematic reviews of deprescribing studies by characteristics of intervention, population, medicine, and setting. Clinical and humanistic outcomes, barriers and facilitators, and tools for deprescribing are presented. The Medline database was used. The search was limited to systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in English up to April 2022. Reviews reporting deprescribing were included, while those where depre-scribing was not planned and supervised by a healthcare professional were excluded. A total of 94 systematic reviews (23 meta--analyses) were included. Most explored clinical or humanistic outcomes (70/94, 74 %); less explored attitudes, facilitators, or barriers to deprescribing (17/94, 18 %); few focused on tools (8/94, 8.5 %). Reviews assessing clinical or humanistic outcomes were divided into two groups: reviews with deprescribing intervention trials (39/70, 56 %; 16 reviewing specific deprescribing interventions and 23 broad medication optimisation interventions), and reviews with medication cessation trials (31/70, 44 %). Deprescribing was feasible and resulted in a reduction of inappropriate medications in reviews with deprescribing intervention trials. Complex broad medication optimisation interventions were shown to reduce hospitalisation, falls, and mortality rates. In reviews of medication cessation trials, a higher frequency of adverse drug withdrawal events underscores the importance of prioritizing patient safety and exercising caution when stopping medicines, particularly in patients with clear and appropriate indications.