Search

Improving the quality of medication use and medication safety are important priorities for healthcare providers who care for older adults. The objective of this article was to identify four exemplary articles with this focus in 2022. We selected high‐quality studies from an OVID search and hand searching of major high impact journals that advanced the field of research forward. The chosen articles cover domains related to deprescribing, medication safety, and optimizing medication use. The MedSafer Study, a cluster randomized clinical trial in Canada, evaluated whether patient specific deprescribing reports generated by electronic decision support software resulted in reduced adverse drug events in the 30 days post hospital discharge in older adults (domain: deprescribing). The second study, a retrospective cohort study using data from Premier Healthcare Database, examined in‐hospital adverse clinical events associated with perioperative gabapentin use among older adults undergoing major surgery (domain: medication safety). The third study used an open‐label parallel controlled trial in 39 Australian aged‐care facilities to examine the effectiveness of a pharmacist‐led intervention to reduce medication‐induced deterioration and adverse reactions (domain: optimizing medication use). Lastly, the fourth study engaged experts in a Delphi method process to develop a consensus list of clinically important prescribing cascades that adversely affect older persons' health to aid clinicians to identify, prevent, and manage prescribing cascades (domain: optimizing medication use). Collectively, this review succinctly highlights pertinent topics related to promoting safe use of medications and promotes awareness of optimizing older adults' medication regimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Central nervous system (CNS) active medications have been consistently linked to falls in older people. However, few randomized trials have evaluated whether CNS-active medication reduction reduces falls and fall-related injuries. The objective of the Reducing CNS-active Medications to Prevent Falls and Injuries in Older Adults (STOP-FALLS) trial is to test the effectiveness of a health-system-embedded deprescribing intervention focused on CNS-active medications on the incidence of medically treated falls among community-dwelling older adults. Methods: We will conduct a pragmatic, cluster-randomized, parallel-group, controlled clinical trial within Kaiser Permanente Washington to test the effectiveness of a 12-month deprescribing intervention consisting of (1) an educational brochure and self-care handouts mailed to older adults prescribed one or more CNS-active medications (aged 60 + : opioids, benzodiazepines and Z-drugs; aged 65 + : skeletal muscle relaxants, tricyclic antidepressants, and antihistamines) and (2) decision support for their primary health care providers. Outcomes are examined over 18–26 months post-intervention. The primary outcome is first incident (post-baseline) medically treated fall as determined from health plan data. Our sample size calculations ensure at least 80% power to detect a 20% reduction in the rate of medically treated falls for participants receiving care within the intervention (n = 9) versus usual care clinics (n = 9) assuming 18 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes include medication discontinuation or dose reduction of any target medications. Safety outcomes include serious adverse drug withdrawal events, unintentional overdose, and death. We will also examine medication signetur fields for attempts to decrease medications. We will report factors affecting implementation of the intervention. Discussion: The STOP-FALLS trial will provide new information about whether a health-system-embedded deprescribing intervention that targets older participants and their primary care providers reduces medically treated falls and CNS-active medication use. Insights into factors affecting implementation will inform future research and healthcare organizations that may be interested in replicating the intervention. Trial registration: ClinicalTrial.gov NCT05689554. Registered on 18 January 2023, retrospectively registered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While many studies have assessed and measured patient attitudes toward deprescribing, less quantitative research has addressed the provider perspective. We thus sought to describe provider knowledge, beliefs, and self‐efficacy to deprescribe, with a focus on opioids and sedative‐hypnotics. Methods: An electronic anonymous survey was distributed to primary care providers at Kaiser Permanente Washington. Two reminder emails were sent. The survey included 10 questions on general deprescribing, and six questions each specific to opioid and sedative‐hypnotic deprescribing. Knowledge questions used a multiple‐choice response option format. Questions addressing beliefs and self‐efficacy (i.e., confidence) used a 0–10 Likert scale. Scales were dichotomized at ≥7 to define agreement (belief questions) or confidence (self‐efficacy questions). We calculated descriptive statistics to summarize the responses. Results: Of 370 eligible primary care providers, 95 (26%) completed the survey. For general deprescribing questions, a majority believed that lack of patient willingness, withdrawal symptoms and fear of symptom return, and time constraints impeded deprescribing. Approximately half chose the correct answers about opioid deprescribing, 21% were confident that they could alleviate patient concerns about opioid tapering, and 32% were confident managing chronic non‐cancer pain without opioids. For sedative‐hypnotics, 64%–87% of respondents correctly answered questions about risks and the relative effectiveness of alternatives, but only one‐third correctly answered a question about sedative‐hypnotic tapering. Roughly half were confident in their ability to successfully engage patients in sedative deprescribing conversations and select alternatives. Only 54% and 34% were confident in writing a tapering protocol for opioids and sedative‐hypnotics, respectively. Conclusion: Results suggest that raising provider awareness of patient willingness to deprescribe, addressing knowledge gaps, and increasing self‐efficacy for deprescribing are important targets for improving deprescribing. Support for writing tapering protocols and prescribing evidence‐based drug and non‐drug alternatives may be important to improve care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses several medication-related issues, particularly the adverse drug withdrawal events (ADWE), and their potential adverse effects to older people. Other topics include the types of ADWEs, namely, return of underlying disease and physiological withdrawal reaction, and how to handle drugs like anticonvulsants, corticosteroids, and benzodiazepine receptor agonists to prevent ADWEs.

Objective: The growing deprescribing field is challenged by a lack of consensus around evidence and knowledge gaps. The objective of this overview of systematic reviews was to summarize the review evidence for deprescribing interventions in older adults. Methods: 11 databases were searched from 1st January 2005 to 16th March 2023 to identify systematic reviews. We summarized and synthesized the results in two steps. Step 1 summarized results reported by the included reviews (including meta-analyses). Step 2 involved a narrative synthesis of review results by outcome. Outcomes included medication-related outcomes (e.g., medication reduction, medication appropriateness) or twelve other outcomes (e.g., mortality, adverse events). We summarized outcomes according to subgroups (patient characteristics, intervention type and setting) when direct comparisons were available within the reviews. The quality of included reviews was assessed using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2). Results: We retrieved 3,228 unique citations and assessed 135 full-text articles for eligibility. Forty-eight reviews (encompassing 17 meta-analyses) were included. Thirty-one of the 48 reviews had a general deprescribing focus, 16 focused on specific medication classes or therapeutic categories and one included both. Twelve of 17 reviews meta-analyzed medication-related outcomes (33 outcomes: 25 favored the intervention, 7 found no difference, 1 favored the comparison). The narrative synthesis indicated that most interventions resulted in some evidence of medication reduction while for other outcomes we found primarily no evidence of an effect. Results were mixed for adverse events and few reviews reported adverse drug withdrawal events. Limited information was available for people with dementia, frailty and multimorbidity. All but one review scored low or critically low on quality assessment. Conclusion: Deprescribing interventions likely resulted in medication reduction but evidence on other outcomes, in particular relating to adverse events, or in vulnerable subgroups or settings was limited. Future research should focus on designing studies powered to examine harms, patient-reported outcomes, and effects on vulnerable subgroups. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020178860. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Interpreting results from deprescribing interventions to generate actionable evidence is challenging owing to inconsistent and heterogeneous outcome definitions between studies. We sought to characterize deprescribing intervention outcomes and recommend approaches to measure outcomes for future studies. A scoping literature review focused on deprescribing interventions for polypharmacy and informed a series of expert panel discussions and recommendations. Twelve experts in deprescribing research, policy, and clinical practice interventions participating in the Measures Workgroup of the US Deprescribing Research Network sought to characterize deprescribing outcomes and recommend approaches to measure outcomes for future studies. The scoping review identified 125 papers reflecting 107 deprescribing studies. Common outcomes included medication discontinuation, medication appropriateness, and a broad range of clinical outcomes potentially resulting from medication reduction. Panel recommendations included clearly defining clinically meaningful medication outcomes (e.g., number of chronic medications, dose reductions), ensuring adequate sample size and follow‐up time to capture clinical outcomes resulting from medication discontinuation (e.g., quality of life [QOL]), and selecting appropriate and feasible data sources. A new conceptual model illustrates how downstream clinical outcomes (e.g., reduction in falls) should be interpreted in the context of initial changes in medication measures (e.g., reduction in mean total medications). Areas needing further development include implementation outcomes specific to deprescribing interventions and measures of adverse drug withdrawal events. Generating evidence to guide deprescribing is essential to address patient, caregiver, and clinician concerns about the benefits and harms of medication discontinuation. This article provides recommendations and an initial conceptual framework for selecting and applying appropriate intervention outcomes to support deprescribing research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine older adults' perceptions and identify barriers and enablers to initiating a conversation about stopping medication(s) with their healthcare provider.Methods: We conducted one focus group (n = 3) and in-depth, face-to-face, individual interviews (n = 6) using an interview guide. Older adults aged ≥65 years in a retirement community who were taking ≥5 medications were recruited. Focus groups and interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Both a deductive analysis, informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework, and an inductive analysis were conducted.Results: Five themes and fourteen sub-themes were identified. Theme 1, 'older adult-related barriers', discusses limited or varying self-efficacy, past unsuccessful deprescribing experiences and limited familiarity with medications/deprescribing. Theme 2, 'provider-related barriers', discusses trust, short office visits, lack of communication and multiple providers. Theme 3, 'environmental/social-related barriers', involves limited availability of resources and access to telehealth/internet. The remaining themes (Themes 4-5) identified enablers including strategies to promote older adults' self-efficacy and improved healthcare communication.Conclusion: Consumer-centric tools could improve older adults' self-efficacy to initiate deprescribing conversations.Practice Implications: Removing barriers and implementing enablers may empower older adults to initiate deprescribing conversations with providers to take fewer medications. Ultimately, this could be a catalyst for increased translation of deprescribing in practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Improving the quality of medication use and medication safety are important priorities for prescribers who care for older adults. The objective of this article was to identify four exemplary articles with this focus in 2020. We selected high‐quality studies that moved the field of research forward and were not merely replication studies. The chosen articles cover domains related to deprescribing, medication safety, and optimizing medication use. The first study, a noninferiority randomized clinical trial in England, evaluated whether antihypertensive medication reduction is possible without significant changes in systolic blood pressure control or adverse events over the 12‐week follow‐up (domain: deprescribing). The second study, a prospective cohort study of women at Kaiser Permanente Southern, California, examined the association between bisphosphonate use and atypical femur fracture (domain: medication safety). The third study examined the effectiveness and safety of a multifaceted antimicrobial stewardship and quality improvement initiative in reducing unnecessary antimicrobial use for unlikely cystitis cases in noncatheterized residents in 25 nursing homes across the United States (domain: optimizing medication use). Lastly, the fourth study, a population‐based cohort study in the United Kingdom, examined the association of tramadol use with risk of hip fracture (domain: medication safety). Collectively, this review succinctly highlights pertinent topics related to promoting safe use of medications and promotes awareness of optimizing older adults' medication regimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Improving the quality of medication use and medication safety is an important priority for prescribers who care for older adults. The objective of this article was to identify key articles from 2018 that address these issues. In addition, we selected four of these articles to annotate, critique, and discuss their broader implications for clinical practice. The first study highlights a cluster‐randomized trial that utilized a pharmacist‐led education‐based intervention delivered to both patients and physicians to deprescribe four types of inappropriate medications (sedative‐hypnotics, first‐generation antihistamines, selective nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs, and glyburide). The second study, a nested case‐control study using data from within the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, examined the association between anticholinergic exposure, overall and by anticholinergic medication class, and dementia risk in 40 770 older adults. The third study, a longitudinal cohort study of 1028 Swedish older adults, examined the association between antihypertensive medications and incident dementia. The last study was a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial that investigated the effect of daily low‐dose aspirin (100 mg) for primary prevention on cardiovascular events and major hemorrhage in 19 144 community‐dwelling older adults. Collectively, this current article provides insight into the pertinent topics of medication use quality and safety in older adults and helps raise awareness about optimal prescribing in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2458–2462, 2019 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]