Search

Background Polipharmacy has been identified as a contributing factor to the high hospital readmission rates of heart failure (HF) patients. Nevertheless, there limited evidence on pharmacist-led intervention on the reduction of inappropriate medication use in patients. Objective To summarize the available evidence resulting from interventions, led by pharmacists (alone or as part of a professional team), aimed at reducing inappropriate medications in patients with heart failure. Methods A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE through PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Scopus until June 2020. We reviewed both randomized controlled trials and non-randomized intervention studies.The quality of evidence was assessed in accordance with the modified Cochrane Collaboration tool to assess risk of bias for randomized controlled trials. The search and extraction process followed PRISMA guidelines. Results Of the 4367 records screening, 9 studies were included in the analysis. In 4 (44.4%) studies, the intervention was carried out by a pharmacist working together with a physician; in 4 (44.4%) the intervention was carried out by a pharmacist alone, and in 1 study, the pharmacist collaborated with a nurse. Only 5 (55.5%) studies described the utilization of guidelines or recommendations to carry out the deprescription, and 3 of these showed improved clinical outcomes in the interventional group compared to the control group. The other studies (4, 44.4%) did not follow a specific guideline or recommendation to evaluate the appropriateness of medication, and none of them showed statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes between interventional and control groups. Conclusion Only those studies where pharmacists evaluated the appropriateness of treatment to specific HF guidelines showed significant differences in patients’ clinical outcomes. The development and validation of a specific tool to evaluate medication appropriateness in patients with HF, could contribute to the improvement of patient health.

Deprescribing of medications such as benzodiazepines and benzodiazepine receptor agonists (z-drugs) can be a complex process that varies across practices, specialties, and health care systems. Care coordination among healthcare providers, patients, families, and other healthcare system components is critical to achieving high levels of deprescribing and person-centered care. We present a framework for promoting care coordination in the context of benzodiazepine/z-drug deprescribing. Future efforts are needed to study the impact of better care coordination on benzodiazepines/z-drug discontinuation and other outcomes that are important to stakeholders.

Background: Inappropriate use of clonazepam by the elderly patients is associated with cognitive impairment, delirium and falls. Strategies to optimize its use are important to increase patient safety. Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of a clonazepam deprescription protocol in the elderly. Methods: This is a quasi-experimental study. Elderly people with chronic use of clonazepam and attended in primary care units in two Brazilian municipalities were selected. A deprescription protocol was used, which included five fortnightly meetings between the older adults and the research team, to reduce the dose by 25 %. Patients received instructions on sleep hygiene behaviors and the advantages of clonazepam deprescription; family physicians followed a flowchart for gradual dose reduction. In the 1st and 5th meetings, there were medical appointments for anamnesis and discharge. The monitoring of patients and the application of tests were carried out by the research team. Results: Of the 35 elderly people included in the study, 27 reached the end; 81.5 % achieved deprescription: 22.2 % stopped completely and 59.3 % decreased the dose. At the last meeting, 20 % of elderly patients reported an increase in blood pressure. Conclusions: The high rate of deprescription and the little relevance of clonazepam withdrawal reactions, showed that the use of the protocol was effective. However, the increase in blood pressure and the worsening of sleep quality in the last meeting show the need for adjustment in the last stage of the deprescription process.Trial Registration: The Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBEC) RBR-524ys9; registered June 10, 2019.

Background Although community pharmacists have been actively engaged in patient care, their role in deprescribing is still restricted. Objectives This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a new educational approach designed to catalyze deprescribing in community pharmacies. Methods In this 4-month, randomized, controlled trial, 108 community pharmacies in Egypt were randomly and equally distributed to either the active or the control groups. Participants from the active group pharmacies received 31 deprescribing-related clinical case scenarios, designed according to the available deprescribing guideline and clinical experiences of an expert panel members, and delivered through WhatsApp. Then participants from both groups reported the incidence of potentially inappropriate medicines (PIMs), the frequency of deprescribing opportunities, and related pharmacist interventions. Results Pharmacists from the active group reported a considerably higher incidence of PIMs (20.87%) than that reported by pharmacists from the control group (5.03%). In addition, they made 1326 deprescribing-related interventions, of which 1022 (77.07%) were accepted and 641 (48.34%) were significant interventions. The proportions of cessation of drug therapy, reducing the dose, and persuasion of patients to accept deprescribing pharmacist interventions in the active group were 37.85%, 22.09%, and 10.63%, respectively. In contrast, 150 of 268 deprescribing-related interventions (55.97%) in the active group were accepted. The clinical value and type of deprescribing decision were statistically significant determinants for the acceptance of deprescribing decisions. The mean time needed to persuade the patient about deprescribing and the cost saved per patient across the active and the control groups were 5.09 ± 3.54 minutes versus 10.03 ± 6.19 minutes and 17.88 ± 9.60 U.S. dollars versus 4.49 ± 2.44 U.S. dollars, respectively. Conclusion The intervention proposed improved the frequency and clinical value of deprescribing decisions.

BACKGROUND: Given limited life expectancy of nursing home (NH) residents, harms of continuing beta-blockers may outweigh clinical benefits. Our objective was to describe beta-blocker discontinuation for NH residents during the last year of life, and identify characteristics associated with earlier discontinuation. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study that included all long-stay residents in fee-for-service Medicare who died in 2016 and were prescribed oral beta-blockers one year before death. Beta-blocker discontinuation was defined as a gap in medication on hand for ≥45 days per Medicare Part D claims, measured from the last date drug was on hand. Comorbidities were obtained from Chronic Condition Warehouse, and other characteristics from the Minimum Data Set. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to describe time to first discontinuation. Findings were stratified by cardiac diagnoses, perceived life expectancy of

Background Chronic anticholinergic medication (ACM) prescribing with antipsychotics when no longer clinically indicated can lead to serious side effects and adversely impact patient quality of life. Objectives Through modifications of previously described deprescribing strategies undertaken in an academic, schizophrenia clinic, this quality improvement (QI) project aimed to bolster ACM deprescription where clinically appropriate among patients with schizophrenia and other psychiatric disorders at a community mental health center. Methods A multidisciplinary team involving clinical pharmacists and psychiatrists created web streaming video medical education accredited modules, supplemented by small groups sessions and case consultations, and provided these to psychiatrists and nurse practitioners at a community mental health center over a one-year period. Electronic medical record reports were also generated, highlighting patients who were receiving one of two ACM used in the clinic: benztropine and/or trihexyphenidyl; these were periodically distributed to support appropriate deprescription. Patient education infographic material focused on ACM were also created and deployed. Results One hundred and twenty-six patients were identified as receiving benztropine or trihexyphenidyl in March 2019. One hundred and six (84%) were on one or both of these medications for at least six months. The mean (±SD) age of the study sample was 53.4 (±12.6) years; a third of the sample was over 60 years. Thirty-seven patients, or 29.4%, had their ACM discontinued or the dosage reduced. Deprescription was not associated with age, sex, race, or diagnosis. Deprescription was not associated with antipsychotic polypharmacy, first versus second generation, or oral versus long acting preparation. Conclusions These results suggest that deprescription of ACM in a community mental health center can occur with prescriber education and support. However, results from previous stages of this QI project, where much higher rates of deprescription were demonstrated, indicate the important benefit of more direct clinical pharmacist support and involvement in the process.

Background Polypharmacy is defined as the prescription of at least 5 different medicines for therapeutic or prophylactic effect and is a serious issue among elderly patients, who are frequently affected by multi-morbidity. Deprescribing is one of the proposed approaches to reduce the number of administered drugs, by eliminating those that are inappropriately prescribed. The aim of this systematic review is to provide an updated and systematic assessment of the benefit-risk profile of deprescribing of anti-hypertensive drugs, which are among the most commonly used drugs. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library were searched for studies assessing the efficacy and safety of anti-hypertensive drugs deprescribing in the period between January, 12,016 and December, 312,019. The quality of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was assessed using the GRADE approach for the evaluation of the main outcomes. The risk of bias assessment was carried out using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Results Overall, two RCTs were identified. Despite summarized evidence was in favor of anti-hypertensive deprescribing, the overall risk of bias was rated as high for each RCT included. According to the GRADE approach, the overall quality of the RCTs included was moderate regarding the following outcomes: systolic blood pressure Conclusions This updated systematic review of the efficacy and safety of anti-hypertensive treatment deprescribing found two recently published RCTs, in addition to the previous guideline of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Evidence points towards non-inferiority of anti-hypertensive deprescribing as compared to treatment continuation, despite the quality of published studies is not high. High quality experimental studies are urgently needed to further assess the effect of deprescribing for this drug class in specific categories of patients.

The overarching goal of this study was to simultaneously model the dynamic relationships among statin exposure, statin discontinuation, and potentially statin‐related myopathic outcomes. We extracted data from the Indiana Network of Patient Care for 134,815 patients who received statin therapy between January 4, 2004, and December 31, 2008. All individuals began statin treatment, some discontinued statin use, and some experienced myopathy and/or rhabdomyolysis while taking the drug or after discontinuation. We developed a militate model to characterize 12 transition probabilities among six different states defined by use or discontinuation of statin and its associated myopathy or rhabdomyolysis. We found that discontinuation of statin therapy was common and frequently early, with 44.4% of patients discontinuing therapy after 1 month, and discontinuation is a strong indicator for statin‐induced myopathy (risk ratio, 10.8; p

Background Understanding how patient values and preferences towards polypharmacy and deprescribing have been studied is important to gain insight on current knowledge in this area and to identify knowledge gaps. Aim To describe methods and outcomes for studying patient values and preferences towards polypharmacy and deprescribing, and to identify gaps in the existing literature. Method A scoping review was conducted on English-language studies that examined patient preferences and values related to polypharmacy and/or deprescribing among community-dwelling adults. MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO, EconLit, Social Science Citation Index, Science Citation Index Expanded, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and CINAHL/AgeLine were searched. Results Thirty articles were included. Surveys (n = 17, 56.7%), interviews/focus groups (n = 9, 30.0%), and mixed methods (n = 3, 10.0%), were commonly used methods. Patients Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (PATD) was the most common tool used (n = 9, 30.0%). Twelve themes related to attitudes, social pressure, and control of polypharmacy/deprescribing were identified. The most frequently-encountered themes included desire or willingness to reduce medication load and influence of healthcare provider on medication use. Conclusion PATD was commonly used to assess preferences and values towards polypharmacy and limited knowledge on patient-important outcomes were addressed. Future research should focus on shared decision-making and communicating risk versus benefit of medications.

In a national sample of Medicare nursing home residents with dementia treated with bisphosphonates, 20% had bisphosphonates deprescribed. Residents with clinical characteristics representing decreased likelihood for long-term benefit were more likely to have bisphosphonates deprescribed. Future studies are needed to evaluate outcomes of deprescribing bisphosphonates in this population. To determine incidence of deprescribing bisphosphonates among nursing home (NH) residents with dementia and identify factors associated with deprescribing. 2015–2016 Medicare claims, Part D prescriptions, Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0, and Nursing Home Compare for non-skilled NH residents aged 65 + with dementia and prescriptions for oral bisphosphonates overlapping the first 14 days of the stay. Our primary definition for deprescribing was a 90-day gap in medication supply; we also explored the reliability of different deprescribing definitions (30-, 90-, 180-day gaps). We estimated associations of NH, provider, and resident characteristics with deprescribing bisphosphonates using competing risks regression models. Most NH residents with dementia treated with bisphosphonates (n = 5312) were ≥ 80 years old (72%), white (81%), and female (90%); about half were dependent for transfers (50%) or mobility (45%). Using a 90-day gap in supply, the 180-day cumulative incidence of deprescribing bisphosphonates was 14.8%. This increased to 32.1% using a 30-day gap and decreased to 11.7% using a 180-day gap. Factors associated with increased likelihood for bisphosphonate deprescribing were age ≥ 90 years, newly admitted (vs. prevalent stay), dependent for mobility, swallowing difficulty, > 1 hospitalization in the prior year, CCRC facility, and nurse practitioner primary provider (vs. physician). Cancer and western geographic region were associated with reduced likelihood for deprescribing. In a national sample of NH residents with dementia, bisphosphonate deprescribing was uncommon, and associated with clinical characteristics signifying poor prognosis and decreased likelihood for long-term benefit. Future studies should evaluate clinical outcomes of deprescribing bisphosphonates in this population.

Due to age and impaired kidney function, older adults with kidney disease are at increased risk of medication-related problems and related hospitalizations. One proa ctive approach to minimize this risk is deprescribing. Deprescribing refers to the systematic process of reducing or stopping a medication. Aside from preventing harm, deprescribing can potentially optimize patients’ quality of life by aligning medications with their goals of care. For some patients, deprescribing could involve less aggressive management of their diabetes and/or hypertension. In other instances, deprescribing targets may include potentially inappropriate medications that carry greater risk of harm than benefit in older adults, medications that have questionable efficacy, including medications that have varying efficacy by degree of kidney function, and that increase medication regimen complexity. We include a guide for clinicians to utilize in deprescribing, the List, Evaluate, Shared Decision-Making, Support (LESS) framework. The LESS framework provides key considerations at each step of the deprescribing process that can be tailored for the medications and context of individu al patients. Patient characteristics or clinical events that warrant consideration of deprescribing include limited life expectancy, cognitive impairment, and health status changes, such as dialysis initiation or recent hospitalization. We acknowledge patient-, clinician-, and system-level challenges to the depre scribing process. These include patient hesitancy and challenges to discussing goals of care, clinician time constraints and a lack of evidence-based guidelines, and system-level challenges of interoperable electronic health records and limited incentives for deprescribing. However, novel evidence-based tools designed to facilitate deprescribing and future evidence on effectiveness of deprescribing could help mitigate these barriers. This review provides foundational knowledge on deprescribing as an emerging component of clinical practice and research within nephrology.

Introduction Major barriers in deprescribing are the ambivalence of patients, resistance to change, and poor acceptance of alternative treatments. Objective To investigate older patients’ beliefs, understanding and knowledge, satisfaction with medicine use, health outcome priorities, their attitude toward deprescribing, and to identify associated patient factors. Methods This multi-center cross-sectional, semistructured survey study involved older outpatients (70 years of age and older) with polypharmacy. The survey comprised three validated questionnaires: Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire, Patients’ Attitudes Towards Deprescribing questionnaire, and the Health Outcome Prioritization tool, with additional questions about understanding and satisfaction. The association between questionnaire outcomes and patient characteristics was investigated. Results Fifty participants were included; they used an average of 9 (+/- SD 2.7) medicines. For most participants (82%), the necessity of using medicines outweighed their concerns. Participants could name 35% of their medicines and 43% of the indications. Overall, 76% were satisfied with the effect of their medicines, but 94% would be willing to stop their medication if advised by their doctor. Maintaining independence (46%) and reducing pain (31%) were the most important health outcome priorities reported by the patients; staying alive had the lowest priority (51%). Participants with higher levels of educational attainment had better knowledge and had more concerns about harmful effects. Conclusions Patients are open to deprescribing but would probably not initiate the conversation themselves because they are generally very satisfied with their medicines. Knowledge about their medicines and their indications is poor. If doctors initiate deprescribing, patients are probably willing to follow their advice. Patients’ life priorities should be discussed in deprescribing conversations.

It is estimated that approximately half of adults, older than 65 years of age, have been prescribed potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). This study’s objective was to determine the prevalence of PIM use among older patients. Two retrospective chart reviews were performed on 200 and 164 older patients who underwent comprehensive geriatric assessments (CGAs) at outpatient geriatrics clinics at the Glenrose Rehabilitation Hospital (Glenrose) in 2012–13 and at the Misericordia Community Hospital (Misericordia) in 2016–17, respectively. Outcome measures included demographics; prevalence of PIM use; common PIMs used; whether PIM use was addressed, and if so, how; and total number of oral medications. At the Glenrose, the prevalence of PIM use was 45 per cent (90/200). Of the 90 patients who had used PIMs, 46.7 per cent (42/90) had at least one of their medications stopped or modified. At the Misericordia, the prevalence of PIM use was 57.3 per cent (94/164). Of the 94 patients who used PIMs, 47.9 per cent (45/94) had at least one of their medications stopped or modified. These results suggest that an increased awareness of PIM among physicians is needed to further decrease PIM use.

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most frequently prescribed drugs, but they are being overprescribed. To evaluate the applicability of a deprescription algorithm in hospitalized patients with chronic PPI use. A prospective study including consecutive gastroenterology department hospitalized patients with chronic PPI use. The prescription was reassessed and a deprescribing algorithm was applied. Follow-up was carried out at 4, 12, and 24 weeks. A total of 513 (44.22%) of 1160 had chronic PPI use; 371 met inclusion criteria and were evaluated: 285 (76.82%) with appropriate prescription and 86 (23.18%) with inappropriate, mainly (52.30%) due to polypharmacy. Seventy-five patients accepted the deprescribing process. Sixty-one (81.33%) maintained deprescription at week 4, 56 (74.66%) at week 12, and 54 (72.00%) at week 24. Eleven of 21 restarted the PPI because of symptoms. No differences were found between the successful deprescription group and the unsuccessful one, regarding sex (p = 0.877), age (p = 0.635), PPI indication (p = 0.663), or deprescription regimen (p = 0.805). No patient had any adverse event attributable to deprescription. There is a high inappropriate indication for PPIs in patients admitted to the gastroenterology department. The application of a patient-centered deprescribing algorithm is a safe and effective strategy to reduce their inappropriate consumption in the medium term.

Background Deprescribing (planned, supervised discontinuation) of statins may be considered in some older persons. This should be carefully discussed between patients and GPs. Methods We examined GPs’ preferences for discussing statin deprescribing by conducting a discrete choice experiment (DCE) sent to a stratified random sample of 500 Danish GPs. Attributes were discussion topics (goals of therapy, evidence on statin use in older persons, adverse effects, uncertainty), and levels were the depth of the discussion topics (none, brief, detailed). We used mixed logistic regression for analysis. Results A total of 90 GPs (mean age 48, 54% female, mean 11 years in practice) completed the DCE. There was substantial variability in which topics GPs felt were most important to discuss; however, GPs generally preferred a brief discussion of topics to detailed ones. The most important discussion topic appeared to be goals of therapy. GPs felt a brief discussion of evidence was important but not a detailed one, while adverse effects and uncertainty were felt to be less important to discuss. Conclusion GPs prefer brief discussions on a range of topics when discussing statin deprescribing but have differing views on which topics are most important. For deprescribing communication tools to be useful to GPs in clinical practice, they may need to focus on brief coverage of the range of relevant topics. Future work should evaluate patient preferences, and opportunities for education and training for GPs on deprescribing communication.

BACKGROUND Deprescribing is gaining attention of medical community to address polypharmacy. Existing deprescribing tools were not validated in haemodialysis population. We designed this study to assess the pill burden of patients undergoing haemodialysis and to measure the outcome after implementation of an active deprescribing program. METHODS An evidence based deprescription tool was formulated. All patients who were on dialysis for 3 months or more were eligible to participate. Medication reconciliation followed by medication list evaluation for appropriateness was done for all patients. All inappropriate medications were discontinued followed by monitoring for 6 months for complications. Primary outcome was the average number of medications and pills per patient before and 12 weeks after implementation of deprescribing program. RESULTS We enrolled 150 patients to the active deprescribing program. Mean age was 60.4 ± 10.9 years. After deprescription, there were significant reduction in the number of medications from 11 (Interquartile range 8-13.25) to 8 (IQR 6-9) (p

Background: Polypharmacy and inappropriate medication use are an increasing concern. Deprescribing may improve medication use through planned and supervised dose reduction or stopping of medications. As most medication management occurs in primary health care, which is generally described as the first point of access for day-to-day care, deprescribing in primary health care is the focus on this review. Objective: This scoping review aimed to identify and characterize strategies for deprescribing in primary health care and map the strategies to the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW). Methods: A scoping review was conducted that involved searches of six databases (2002–2018) and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews and included studies. Studies that described and evaluated deprescribing strategies in primary health care were eligible. Two independent reviewers screened articles and completed data charting with charting verified by a third. Deprescribing strategies were mapped to the intervention functions of the BCW and linked to specific Behaviour Change Techniques (BCT). Results: Searches yielded 6871 citations of which 43 were included. Nineteen studies were randomized, 24 were non-randomized. Studies evaluated deprescribing in terms of medication changes, feasibility, and prescriber/patient perspectives. Deprescribing strategies involved various professionals (physicians, pharmacists, nurses), as well as patients and were generally multifaceted. A wide range of intervention functions were identified, with 41 BCTs mapped to Environmental restructuring, 38 BCTs mapped to Enablement, and 34 BCTs mapped to Persuasion. Conclusions: Deprescribing strategies in primary health care have used a variety of BCTs to address individual professionals (e.g. education) as well as strategies that addressed the practice setting, including support from additional team members (e.g. pharmacists, nurses and patients). Further research is warranted to determine comparative effectiveness of different BCTs, which can help facilitate implementation of deprescribing strategies, thereby reducing polypharmacy, in primary health care. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Background Deprescribing may benefit older frail patients experiencing polypharmacy. We investigated the scope for deprescribing in acutely hospitalised patients and the long-term implications of continuation of medications that could potentially be deprescribed. Methods Acutely hospitalised patients (n = 170) discharged to Residential Aged Care Facilities, ≥75 years and receiving ≥5 regular medications were assessed during admission to determine eligibility for deprescribing of key drug classes, along with the actual incidence of deprescribing. The impact of continuation of nominated drug classes (anticoagulants, antidiabetics, antiplatelets, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), statins) on a combined endpoint (death/readmission) was determined. Results Hyperpolypharmacy (>10 regular medications) was common (49.4%) at admission. Varying rates of deprescribing occurred during hospitalisation for the nominated drug classes (8–53%), with considerable potential for further deprescribing (34–90%). PPI use was prevalent (56%) and 89.5% of these had no clear indication. Of the drug classes studied, only continued PPI use at discharge was associated with increased mortality/readmission at 1 year (hazard ratio 1.54, 95% confidence interval (1.06–2.26), P = 0.025), driven largely by readmission. Conclusion There is considerable scope for acute hospitalisation to act as a triage point for deprescribing in older patients. PPIs in particular appeared overprescribed in this susceptible patient group, and this was associated with earlier readmission. Polypharmacy in older hospitalised patients should be targeted for possible deprescribing during hospitalisation, especially PPIs.

BackgroundGiven the prevalence of long-term benzodiazepine (BZD) prescribing, increased monitoring through the implementation of prescription monitoring programmes (PMPs) may be the necessary impetus to promote BZD deprescribing. Despite evidence promoting the importance of patient-centred care, GPs have not been sufficiently supported to implement these principles through current deprescribing practice.AimTo investigate patients’ perception of their prescriber’s influence on ceasing BZD use, including their willingness to take their advice, and to understand how a patient’s stage of change influences the barriers and facilitators they perceive to discontinuing BZDs.Design and settingAn online survey and qualitative interviews with 22 long-term users of BZD (≥6 months), aged 18–69 years, recruited from the general population in Victoria, Australia.MethodTwo groups of users of BZD participated, one in the process of reducing their BZD and one not reducing, and were categorised according to their stage of change. Data underwent thematic analysis to identify barriers and facilitators to reducing BZDs both at the patient level and the prescriber level.ResultsBZD patients’ perceptions of the prescriber influence were characterised by prescribing behaviours, treatment approach, and attitude. Barriers and facilitators to reducing their BZD were mapped against their stage of change. Irrespective of their stage of change, participants reported they would be willing to try reducing their BZD if they trusted their prescriber.ConclusionThis study illustrates that, with a few key strategies at each step of the deprescribing conversation, GPs are well positioned to tackle the issue of long-term BZD use in a manner that is patient centred.

Background: Lack of guidance is highlighted as a barrier to deprescribing in palliative care. Two deprescribing tools exist, but with inclusion and exclusion criteria that limit utility. The tools ...

BackgroundAs long-term use of benzodiazepines increases, adverse effects also become more frequent, especially in elderly adults. Due the potential of causing dependence, poor patient adherence and a lack of awareness of side effects, deprescription is challenging.ObjectiveThis study aimed to identify what are the effective approaches to motivate and promote deprescription of benzodiazepines.MethodsWe used MeSH terms to search in five databases that were MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, LILACS, SCIELO and Science Direct. Then, we selected articles accordingly to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Risk of bias assessment for randomized controlled trials and prospective interventional studies was made using RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tools, respectively. For cohort studies, we used the clarity group by McMaster University tool.ResultsDatabase search retrieved 412 results, and 11 studies were selected for analysis. Interventions focusing on patient education to improve community awareness about deprescription presented better discontinuation rates and more potential on motivating discussions about deprescribing with physicians. Interventions based on counselling by different health professionals were not well evaluated as they presented four of six studies as high, serious or critical risk of bias.ConclusionsAlthough the comparison of different strategies was impaired by the high risk of bias in some studies, patient education focused interventions presented good results. Future studies should consider doing a follow-up of 6 months or longer with evaluation of withdrawal symptoms and sleep patterns, inclusion of young adults on the sample and some form of cognitive evaluation that might influence the results of the intervention.

Four major medical societies involved with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) therapy concur on the need for common principles and cooperation to minimize the risk of ocular toxicity. At a daily dosage of ≤5 mg/kg/day actual body weight, the risk of retinal toxicity from HCQ is

Background Despite growing evidence that deprescribing can improve clinical outcomes, quality of life and reduce the likelihood of adverse drug events, the practice is not widespread, particularly in hospital settings. Clinical risk assessment tools, like the Drug Burden Index (DBI), can help prioritise patients for medication review and prioritise medications to deprescribe, but are not integrated within routine care. The aim of this study was to conduct formative usability testing of a computerised decision support (CDS) tool, based on DBI, to identify modifications required to the tool prior to trialling in practice. Methods Our CDS tool comprised a DBI MPage in the electronic medical record (clinical workspace) that facilitated review of a patient’s DBI and medication list, access to deprescribing resources, and the ability to deprescribe. Two rounds of scenario-based formative usability testing with think-aloud protocol were used. Seventeen end-users participated in the testing, including junior and senior doctors, and pharmacists. Results Participants expressed positive views about the DBI CDS tool but testing revealed a number of clear areas for improvement. These primarily related to terminology used (i.e. what is a DBI and how is it calculated?), and consistency of functionality and display. A key finding was that users wanted the CDS tool to look and function in a similar way to other decision support tools in the electronic medical record. Modifications were made to the CDS tool in response to user feedback. Conclusion Usability testing proved extremely useful for identifying components of our CDS tool that were confusing, difficult to locate or to understand. We recommend usability testing be adopted prior to implementation of any digital health intervention. We hope our revised CDS tool equips clinicians with the knowledge and confidence to consider discontinuation of inappropriate medications in routine care of hospitalised patients. In the next phase of our project, we plan to pilot test the tool in practice to evaluate its uptake and effectiveness in supporting deprescribing in routine hospital care.

Objective To evaluate deprescribing of select high-risk medications (HRMs) in an Acute Care for the Elderly (ACE) unit with pharmacist involvement compared with usual care in older people. Design Retrospective, single-center case-control study. Setting Medical-surgical units at an urban academic medical center. Participants Patients 65 years of age and older admitted April-June 2019, with 1 or more of the following target HRMs prior to admission were included in the study: acid suppressants, antipsychotics, or insulin. Patients admitted to the ACE unit were included in the case group; all other patients were randomly matched by HRMs in a 2:1 ratio into the control group. Interventions The Acute Care for the Elderly pharmacist reviewed patients’ medications to identify and deprescribe select HRMs. Deprescribing was defined as discontinuation, dose or frequency reduction. Results A total of 47 patients with 56 HRMs and 89 patients with 126 HRMs were included in the case and control groups, respectively. The primary outcome of HRMs deprescribed were similar between the case and control groups (21.4% and 25.4%; P = 0.56). Among the HRMs deprescribed (discontinued, dose or frequency reduced), 83.2% were complete discontinuations in case patients and 34.4% were complete discontinuations in control patients.

Background/aim We aimed to identify clinical settings of renal transplant patients with COVID-19. Materials and methods In this retrospective study, we included kidney transplant inpatients with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 who had been discharged or had died by October 1st, 2020. Characteristics of the patients, including basal and last outpatient biochemical parameters were recorded. Discontinuation or dosage reduction of immunosuppressives and other treatment information was documented. Results Twenty patients were included in this study, of whom 18 were discharged and 2 died in hospital. The mean duration of hospitalization and follow-up were 9.7 ± 6.4 days and 4.5 ± 2.0 months, respectively. Fourteen patients (70%) were male and mean age was 48.0 ± 10.3 years. At admission, all had immunosuppression withdrawn and were started on methylprednisolone 16 mg/ day (50%) or dexamethasone (50%). Tacrolimus/m-TOR inhibitors were reduced by 50% and all antimetabolites were discontinued. Hemodialysis was needed for 10% of patients. Acute kidney injury was detected in 25% of the patients. With respect to hospitalization time and complications, there was no significant difference between patients who used dexamethasone and those who did not (P > 0.05). The discontinued immunosuppressives were resumed within 2 to 4 weeks after discharge according to the severity of disease. No rehospitalization or acute rejection was detected during the follow-up of the patients. Conclusion Renal transplant patients are considered a high risk group for COVID-19. It can be said that discontinuation or reducing dosages of immunosuppressives may be effective and safe in kidney transplant patients.

Objective Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in whom remission is achieved following combination therapy with methotrexate plus etanercept face an ongoing medication burden. This study was undertaken to investigate whether sustained remission achieved on combination therapy can be maintained with either methotrexate or etanercept monotherapy, as assessed following discontinuation of one or the other medication from the combination. Methods Of the 371 adult patients with RA who received combination therapy with methotrexate plus etanercept, remission (defined as a Simplified Disease Activity Index [SDAI] score of ≤3.3) was sustained in 253 patients through a 24‐week open‐label period. These 253 patients then entered a 48‐week, double‐blind period and were randomized to receive either 1) methotrexate monotherapy (n = 101), 2) etanercept monotherapy (n = 101), or 3) methotrexate plus etanercept combination therapy (n = 51). Patients who subsequently experienced disease‐worsening received rescue therapy with the combination regimen at the same dosages as used in the initial run‐in period. The primary end point was the proportion of patients in whom SDAI‐defined remission was maintained without disease‐worsening at week 48 in the etanercept monotherapy group as compared to the methotrexate monotherapy group. Secondary end points included time to disease‐worsening, and the proportion of patients in whom SDAI‐defined remission was recaptured after initiation of rescue therapy. Results Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics of the RA patients were similar across the treatment groups. At week 48, SDAI‐defined remission was maintained in significantly more patients in the etanercept monotherapy group than in the methotrexate monotherapy group (49.5% versus 28.7%; P = 0.004). Moreover, as a secondary end point, sustained SDAI‐defined remission was achieved in significantly more patients who received combination therapy than in those who received methotrexate monotherapy (52.9% versus 28.7%; P = 0.006). Time to disease‐worsening was shorter in those who received methotrexate monotherapy than in those who received etanercept monotherapy or those who received combination therapy (each P < 0.001 versus methotrexate monotherapy). Among the patients who received rescue therapy, SDAI‐defined remission was recaptured in 70–80% in each treatment group. No new safety signals were reported. Conclusion The efficacy of etanercept monotherapy was superior to that of methotrexate monotherapy and similar to that of combination therapy in maintaining remission in patients with RA. SDAI‐defined remission was recaptured in most of the patients who were given rescue therapy. These data could inform decision‐making when withdrawal of therapy is being considered to reduce treatment burden in patients with well‐controlled RA.

Polypharmacy is common in older adults with cancer and deprescribing potentially inappropriate medications becomes very relevant when life expectancy decreases due to metastatic disease. Especially preventive medications may no longer be beneficial, because they may decrease quality of life and reduction in morbidity and mortality may be futile. Although deprescribing of preventive medication is common in the last period of life, it is still unusual during active cancer treatment for advanced disease, although life expectancy is often limited to less than 1 to 2 years in that stage. We performed a systematic search of the literature in Pubmed and Embase on the discontinuation of commonly utilized groups of preventive medication and evaluated the evidence of potential benefits and harms in patients aged 65 years or older with cancer and a limited life expectancy (LLE). From 21 included studies, it can be concluded that deprescribing lipid lowering drugs, antihypertensive drugs, osteoporosis drugs and antihyperglycemic drugs is feasible in a considerable part of patients with a LLE. Discontinuation may be performed safely, without the occurrence of serious adverse events or decrease of survival. The only study that addressed quality of life after deprescribing showed that discontinuation of statins improves quality of life in patients with a LLE. Recurrence of symptoms requiring reintroduction occurred in 0-13% of patients on antihyperglycemic treatment and 8-60% of patients using antihypertensive drugs. In order to reduce pill burden and futile treatment clinicians should discuss deprescribing of preventive medication with older patients with advanced cancer and a LLE.

Objective To investigate the impact of medication reviews using collegial mentoring and systematic clinical evaluation on psychotropic prescriptions, behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD), and activities of daily living (ADL). Design Four-month multicenter, multicomponent, cluster-randomized, single-blinded controlled trial. Setting Thirty-three Norwegian nursing homes including 67 nursing home wards (clusters). Participants A total of 723 enrolled patients, of which 428 participated in the study; 217 were randomized to the intervention and 211 to care as usual (control). Intervention The COSMOS intervention consisted of Communication, Systematic pain management, Medication reviews, Organization of activities, and Safety. During medication review, the nursing home physician evaluated treatment with colleagues systematically using the results from validated clinical assessments. Measurements Mean changes from baseline to month 4 in the number of prescribed psychotropic drugs (antipsychotics, anxiolytics, hypnotics or sedatives, antidepressants, and antidementia drugs); Neuropsychiatric Inventory Nursing Home Version (NPI-NH) and Cornell Scale of Depression in Dementia (CSDD); Lawton and Brody's Physical Self Maintenance Scale (PSMS). Results Compared to control, the mean change in prescribed psychotropic drugs was reduced both in total and regular number, while mean changes in NPI-NH and CSDD scores did not differ between the groups. Mean change in PSMS showed improvement in the intervention group, and deterioration in the control group. Conclusion Medication reviews using collegial mentoring and systematic clinical evaluation led to safe deprescribing, as the reductions in psychotropic drug use did not negatively affect BPSD, while ADL improved.

Background Deprescribing is one way to reduce inappropriate polypharmacy in older adult patients. Although algorithms have been published to guide practitioners in deprescribing, it is still unknown how applicable these algorithms are to the general older adult population. Objectives The primary objective was to assess the applicability of published deprescribing protocols in hospitalized older adult patients. Methods This retrospective study included patients aged 65 years or greater who were discharged from an internal medicine team between January 1, 2017 and June 30, 2017. Along with age and admission to internal medicine wards, other eligibility criteria were extracted from published deprescribing protocols. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients eligible for deprescribing based on published algorithms. Secondary endpoints included the proportion of patients receiving medications which were included in an algorithm, proportion of patients using medications included in the algorithms who were eligible for deprescribing, and proportion of patients with medications deprescribed during the hospital stay. Results Two hundred sixty-seven patients were included and 124 (46.4%) used a medication with a published deprescribing algorithm. Thirty-four percent of all patients and 74% (92/124) of patients prescribed medications included in algorithms were eligible for deprescribing. Seven percent (6/92) of patients eligible for deprescribing had medications deprescribed during the hospital stay. Conclusion The application of deprescribing algorithms in hospitalized older adults identified a significant opportunity to initiate deprescribing practices.

Managing inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been a challenge faced by clinicians and their patients, especially concerning whether to proceed with biologics and immunosuppressive agents in the background of a global outbreak of a highly contagious new coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, SARS-CoV-2). The knowledge about the impact of this virus on patients with IBD, although it is still scarce, is rapidly evolving. In particular, concerns surrounding medications' impact for IBD on the risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection or developing COVID-19, and potentially exacerbate viral replication and the COVID-19 course, are a current thinking of both practicing clinicians and providers caring for patients with IBD. Managing patients with IBD infected with SARS-CoV-2 depends on both the clinical activity of the IBD and the occasional development and severity of COVID-19. In this review, we summarize the current data regarding gastrointestinal involvement by SARS-CoV-2 and pharmacologic and surgical management for IBD concerning this infection, and the COVID-19 impact on both the patient's psychological functioning and endoscopy services, and we concisely summarize the telemedicine roles during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background and Aims Multiple medications are associated with an increased risk of incident hepatic encephalopathy. Despite this known risk, medications such as opioids, benzodiazepines, gabapentin/pregabalin, and/or proton pump inhibitors are increasingly prescribed to persons with cirrhosis. Deprescribing is a promising intervention to reduce the burden of hepatic encephalopathy. Given that deprescribing has not been trialed in cirrhosis, we evaluated the barriers and facilitators to safe and successful deprescribing in cirrhosis. Methods We conducted, transcribed, and analyzed semi‐structured interviews using qualitative methodology with 22 subjects. This included eight patients with cirrhosis and recent use of opiates, benzodiazepines, gabapentin/Lyrica, and/or proton pump inhibitors as well as 14 providers (primary care, transplant surgery, transplant hepatology). Interviews explored opinions, behaviors, and understanding surrounding the risks and benefits of deprescribing. Results Major provider‐specific barriers included deferred responsibility of the deprescribing process, knowledge gaps regarding the risk of hepatic encephalopathy associated with medications (e.g., proton pump inhibitors) as well as the safe method of deprescription (i.e., benzodiazepines), and time constraints. Patient‐specific barriers included knowledge gaps regarding the cirrhosis‐specific risks of their medications and anxiety about the recurrence of symptoms after medication discontinuation. Patients uniformly reported trust in their provider's opinions on risks and wished for more comprehensive education during or after visits. Providers uniformly reported support for deprescription resources including pharmacist or nurse outreach. Conclusion Given knowledge of medication risks related to hepatic encephalopathy in patients with cirrhosis, deprescribing is universally seen as important. Knowledge gaps, inaction, and uncertainty regarding feasible alternatives prevent meaningful implementation of deprescription. Trials of protocolized pharmacy‐based deprescribing outreach and patient‐facing education on risks are warranted., Key Summary Summarize the established knowledge on this subject Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a morbid complication of cirrhosis.The risk of HE may be increased by psychoactive medications and proton pump inhibitors.Deprescribing is felt to be a promising approach to HE prevention. What are the significant and/or new findings of this study? Patients are unaware of how their medications influence the risk of HE.Patients are willing to follow physician recommendations regarding deprescribing but are afraid of worsening symptoms.Physicians do not feel comfortable deprescribing opioids or benzodiazepines.Physicians do not feel responsible or equipped with the resources for deprescribing.

Background: The prolonged current survival of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) patients exposes them to new problems arising from the comorbidities they face. Objectives: To describe the situation of comorbidities, polypharmacy, therapeutic complexity and adherence in people living with HIV over 65 years of age and to assess the presence of potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIP) by applying deprescription criteria. Methods: Observational study including HIV people (> 65 years) from a university tertiary level hospital. Demographic, clinical and pharmacotherapeutic characteristics of the patients and their treatments were studied. The prevalence of polypharmacy (> 5 medications) and the pharmacotherapy complexity, quantified by the Medication Regimen Complexity Index (MRCI), were calculated. Therapeutic adherence was assessed by the Simplified Medication Adherence Questionnaire (SMAQ) and the medication possession ratio, according to prescription dispensing records. The Screening Tool of Older People’s Prescriptions (STOPP) and List of Evidence-baSed depreScribing for CHRONic patients (LESS-CHRON) criteria were applied to identify PIP. Main outcome measure: PIP in elderly people living with HIV. Results: Thirty patients were included, 73% of whom were men, with a median age of 71 years (IQR 67 − 76) and a median duration of infection of 17 years (IQR, 9 − 21). Seventy percent of the patients suffered from dyslipemia, 66.7% from hypertension, 43.3% from diabetes and 26.7% from mental health disorders. Seventy percent of the patients took more than 5 medications and 30% more than 10. The MRCI of concomitant medications was higher (18.3 points) than the MRCI of antiretroviral therapy (5.1 points), 66.7% of the studied population was classified as adherent. Finally, 70% of the patients present some PIP according to the STOPP or LESS-CHRON criteria. The polypharmacy was significantly associated (p = 0.008) with meeting deprescription criteria. Conclusion: The elderly people living with HIV present numerous comorbidities and met the criteria for polypharmacy. Their pharmacotherapy complexity is mainly determined by the concomitant treatments. There is a high prevalence of meeting deprescription criteria in people living with HIV over the age of 65 and a clear relationship between polypharmacy and deprescription. The optimization of pharmacotherapy is necessary in this population.

Prescribing medications involves complex cognitive processes, and mistakes in prescription can cause serious adverse events. Deprescribing is one of the last opportunities to prevent patient harm from the use of drugs that should be avoided, especially among older patients. This viewpoint article aims to discuss the prescription process and some essential concepts, such as polypharmacy, prescription of potentially inappropriate medications, and, particularly, the relevance of deprescribing and its relationship with the appropriate prescription of medications in older people.

BACKGROUND: High-risk medications pose serious safety risks to older adults, including increasing the risk of falls. Deprescribing potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in older adults who have experienced a fall is a key element of fall reduction strategies. However, continued use of PIMs in older adults is common, and clinicians may face substantial deprescribing barriers. OBJECTIVE: Explore patient and clinician experiences with and perceptions of deprescribing PIMs in patients with a history of falls. DESIGN: We led guided patient feedback sessions to explore deprescribing scenarios with patient stakeholders and conducted semi-structured interviews with primary care physicians (PCPs) to explore knowledge and awareness of fall risk guidelines, deprescribing experiences, and barriers and facilitators to deprescribing. PARTICIPANTS: PCPs from Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) and patient members of the KPSC Regional Patient Advisory Committee. APPROACH: We used maximum variation sampling to identify PCPs with patients who had a fall, then categorized the resulting PIM dispense distribution for those patients into high and low frequency. We analyzed the data using a hybrid deductive-inductive approach. Coders applied initial deductively derived codes to the data, simultaneously using an open-code inductive approach to capture emergent themes. KEY RESULTS: Physicians perceived deprescribing discussions as potentially contentious, even among patients with falls. Physicians reported varying comfort levels with deprescribing strategies: some felt that the conversations might be better suited to others (e.g., pharmacists), while others had well-planned negotiation strategies. Patients reported lack of clarity as to the reasons and goals of deprescribing and poor understanding of the seriousness of falls. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that key barriers to deprescribing include PCP trepidation about raising a contentious topic and insufficient patient awareness of the potential seriousness of falls. Findings suggest the need for multifaceted, multilevel deprescribing approaches with clinician training strategies, patient educational resources, and a focus on building trusting patient-clinician relationships. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11606-020-06493-8.

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 2019. 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 aspects of suboptimal prescribing and medication safety. The first study used a nationally representative sample of Medicare beneficiaries to examine the continuation of medications with limited benefit in patients admitted for cancer and non-cancer diagnoses in hospice (domain: potentially inappropriate medications). The second study, a retrospective cohort study of older adults in Ontario, Canada, assessed the association between prescribing oral anticoagulants in an emergency department relative to not prescribing anticoagulants in the emergency department and their persistence at 6 months (domain: underuse of medications). The third study, a cluster randomized trial in Quebec, Canada, evaluated the effect of conducting electronic medication reconciliation on several outcomes including adverse drug events and medication discrepancies (domain: medication safety). Lastly, the fourth study, a retrospective study using national inpatient and outpatient Veteran Health Administration combined with clinical and Medicare Claims data, examined the effects of intensification of antihypertensive medications on older adults' likelihood for hospital re-admission and other important clinical outcomes (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 Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Medications to treat disease and extend life in our patients often amass in quantities, resulting in what has been termed "polypharmacy." This imprecise label usually describes the accumulation of 5, and often more, medications. Polypharmacy in advancing age frequently results in drug therapy problems related to interactions, drug toxicity, falls with injury, delirium, and nonadherence. Polypharmacy is associated with resulting increased hospitalizations and higher costs of care for individuals and health care systems. To reduce polypharmacy, we delineate a systematic, consultative approach to identify highest-risk medications and drug-therapy problems. We address strategic reductions (deprescribing) of medications in palliative care, long-term care, and ambulatory older adults. Best practices for reducing opioids, benzodiazepines, and other high-risk medications include education about risk and agreement by patients and their families, advocates, and care teams. Addressing deprescribing should be within the framework of patients' health status as their care and goals transition from longevity to a plan of maintaining alertness, comfort, and satisfaction of quality of life. A team approach to address polypharmacy and avoidance of high-risk therapy is optimal within long-term care. Patients with terminal illnesses or those moving toward a comfort-care emphasis benefit from medication adjustments that are recognized beneficially within each patient's care goals. In caring for older adults, the acknowledgement that complicated regimens and high-risk medications requires a care plan to reduce or prevent medication-related problems and costs that are associated with polypharmacy.

Assess the impact of a new pharmaceutical care model on (1) polypharmacy and (2) potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in long-term care facilities (LTCFs).Pragmatic quasi-experimental study with a control group. This multifaceted model enables pharmacists and nurses to increase their professional autonomy by enforcing laws designed to expand their scope of practice. It also involves a strategic reorganization of care, interdisciplinary training, and systematic medication reviews.Two LTCFs exposed to the model (409 residents) were compared to 2 control LTCFs (282 residents) in Quebec, Canada. All individuals were aged 65 years or older and residing in included LTCFs.Polypharmacy (≥10 medications) and PIM (2015 Beers criteria) were analyzed throughout 12 months between March 2017 and June 2018. Groups were compared before and after implementation using repeated measures mixed Poisson or logistic regression models, adjusting for potential confounding variables.Over 12 months, for regular medications, polypharmacy decreased from 42% to 20% (exposed group) and from 50% to 41% (control group) [difference in differences (DID): 13%, P .001]. Mean number of PIMs also decreased from 0.79 to 0.56 (exposed group) and from 1.08 to 0.90 (control group) (DID: 0.05, P = .002).Compared with usual care, this multifaceted model reduced the probability of receiving ≥10 medications and the mean number of PIMs. Greater professional autonomy, reorganization of care, training, and medication review can optimize pharmaceutical care. As the role of pharmacists is expanding in many countries, this model shows what could be achieved with increased professional autonomy of pharmacists and nurses in LTCFs.

Objective It is unclear if stopping treatment with dabigatran, a new oral anticoagulant (NOAC), induces a paradoxical rebound prothrombotic state. We investigated if short-term (1-3 days) dabigatran cessation is associated with a higher thrombus volume than expected from a simple reversal of the anticoagulant effect. Methods Ten-week-old C57Bl/6 mice (n=338) received one of the following oral treatments: phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), dabigatran for 7 days with or without 1-4 day cessation, and aspirin in either a single dose or daily for 7 days. Some of the animals that ceased dabigatran for 1-3 days received single-dose aspirin. Thereafter, we induced FeCl3 -mediated carotid thrombosis in 130 mice, after which we performed microCT thrombus imaging. The other 208 mice underwent coagulation assays or platelet function tests. As an explorative pilot study, we reviewed the medical records of 18 consecutive patients with NOAC cessation-related cerebral infarction in a large acute stroke cohort. Results We observed a higher volume of carotid thrombus after dabigatran cessation at 1-3 days than after vehicle treatment and showed that this effect could be prevented by single-dose aspirin pretreatment. Dabigatran cessation unduly increased platelet aggregability for 2 days after drug cessation, an effect mediated through arachidonic acid or thrombin, which effect was significantly attenuated by single-dose aspirin pretreatment. In patients, short-term (≤3 day) cessation of NOAC therapy, compared with longer-term (≥5 days) cessation, tended to be associated with relatively high stroke severity. Interpretation We provide the first preclinical evidence that a rebound prothrombotic state follows short-term cessation of dabigatran therapy. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Sedative-use disorder can occur in elderly individuals, but remains a taboo subject. France is the second top-consuming country of benzodiazepines (BZDs) and Z drugs in Europe, with 38% of women >80 years old using these drugs. Despite the recommendations of the French National Authority for Health (HAS) to general practitioners, deprescription remains rare. The aim of this study was to understand the perception of healthcare providers towards BZD or Z drug withdrawal within a psychogeriatric unit and to provide insights from advanced practice nurses (APRNs) on this topic. Eight healthcare providers from different professions in a psychogeriatric unit were interviewed. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim, and the data were analysed following the interpretive phenomenological approach. The COREQ statement was used as a guide in the reporting of the study. Four themes were identified in the interview transcripts: (i) problems specific to the elderly; (ii) problems specific to BZD or Z drug consumption; (iii) present care; and (iv) envisioned practice. While the healthcare providers interviewed appeared to have knowledge on the adverse effects of BZDs, it appears difficult to taper the use of BZDs outside crisis periods of behaviour disorders in elderly patients. Caregivers recommend an evolution of practices, such as introducing BDZ and Z drug withdrawal programs that could involve the emerging profession of APRNs in general practice in France. APRNs could be a valuable resource to screen for BZD-related disorders and to manage withdrawal strategies in complex cases.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2 canakinumab monotherapy tapering regimens in order to maintain complete clinical remission in children with systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). METHODS: The study was designed as a 2-part phase IIIb/IV open-label, randomized trial. In the first part, patients received 4 mg/kg of canakinumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks and discontinued glucocorticoids and/or methotrexate as appropriate. Patients in whom clinical remission was achieved (inactive disease for at least 24 weeks) with canakinumab monotherapy were entered into the second part of the trial, in which they were randomized 1:1 into 1 of 2 treatment arms. In arm 1, the dose of canakinumab was reduced from 4 mg/kg to 2 mg/kg and then to 1 mg/kg, followed by discontinuation. In arm 2, the 4 mg/kg dose interval was prolonged from every 4 weeks, to every 8 weeks, and then to every 12 weeks, followed by discontinuation. In both arms, canakinumab exposure could be reduced provided systemic JIA remained in clinical remission for 24 weeks with each step. The primary objective was to assess whether >40% of randomized patients in either arm maintained clinical remission of systemic JIA for 24 weeks in the first part of the study. RESULTS: In part 1 of the study, 182 patients were enrolled, with 75 of those patients randomized before entering part 2 of the trial. Among the 75 randomized patients, clinical remission was maintained for 24 weeks in 27 (71%) of 38 patients in arm 1 (2 mg/kg every 4 weeks) and 31 (84%) of 37 patients in arm 2 (4 mg/kg every 8 weeks) (P ≤ 0.0001 for arm 1 versus arm 2 among those meeting the 40% threshold). Overall, 25 (33%) of 75 patients discontinued canakinumab, and clinical remission was maintained for at least 24 weeks in all 25 of these patients. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSION: Reduction of canakinumab exposure may be feasible in patients who have achieved clinical remission of systemic JIA, but consistent interleukin-1 inhibition appears necessary to maintain this response. ispartof: ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATOLOGY vol:73 issue:2 pages:336-346 ispartof: location:United States status: published

Acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin) is a commonly prescribed medication, especially in the age group of individuals who undergo elective total hip arthroplasty (THA). Preoperative discontinuation of aspirin is believed to reduce intraoperative bleeding and other complications, but it may increase the risk of perioperative cardiovascular events. In this study we have sought to evaluate the safety of continuous aspirin treatment in patients undergoing elective THA. This is a retrospective analysis of a consecutive cohort who underwent elective THA in a tertiary medical center between 2011 and 2018. The cohort was divided into two groups—one that received continuous preoperative aspirin treatment and one that did not. Blood loss, peri- and postoperative complications, readmissions, and short- and long-term mortality were compared between groups. Out of 757 consecutive patients (293 males, 464 females) who underwent elective primary THA, 552 were in the “non-aspirin” group and 205 were in the “aspirin” group and were not treated preoperative with other medication affecting hemostasis. Perioperative continuation of aspirin treatment did not significantly increase perioperative bleeding, as indicated by changes in hemoglobin levels (P = 0.72). There were no significant differences in short- and long-term mortality (P = 0.47 and P = 0.4, respectively) or other perioperative complications, such as readmission (P = 0.78), deep or superficial infection (P = 1 and P = 0.47, respectively), and cardiovascular events (none in both groups). Peri-operative continuation of aspirin treatment in patients undergoing elective primary THA did not increase perioperative complications or mortality compared to the non-aspirin-treated patients. The protective effects of aspirin from postoperative thrombotic and cardiovascular events are well documented. The current findings dispute the need to preoperatively withhold aspirin treatment in patients undergoing elective primary THA.

Introduction Polypharmacy is increasingly common and can increase the risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), accounting for a significant proportion of hospital admissions. It may also impair functional status and quality of life. Current efforts to improve polypharmacy take place largely in primary care, but there may be a role for increased support from medicines specialists in the secondary care setting. Methods We developed a pilot polypharmacy clinic in secondary care, led by clinical pharmacologists and pharmacists. Medicines were deprescribed as appropriate, based on clinical need and symptoms suspected of being ADRs. An ADR symptom burden was recorded pre- and post-intervention to identify any clinical changes following deprescribing. Results Twenty-four individuals were reviewed. The total number of medicines prescribed to each patient was reduced by a median of 4 (interquartile range (IQR) 2–5), resulting in annual savings in discontinued medicines of £4,957.44. The ADR burden fell from a median of 15 (IQR 14–17) to a median of 7 (IQR 4–11). Conclusion Our pilot clinic reviewed a small number of patients, but demonstrated the potential of such a service to offer both clinical improvements and cost savings. This service could be extended, integrated and sustained to improve care for people taking multiple medicines.

Background Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in Frail adults with limited life expectancy (STOPPFrail) criteria were developed in 2017 to assist physicians with deprescribing decisions in older people approaching end-of-life. Updating was required to make the tool more practical, patient-centred and complete. Methods a thorough literature review was conducted to, first, devise a practical method for identifying older people who are likely to be approaching end-of-life, and second, reassess and update the existing deprescribing criteria. An eight-member panel with a wide-ranging experience in geriatric pharmacotherapy reviewed a new draft of STOPPFrail and were invited to propose new deprescribing criteria. STOPPFrail version 2 was then validated using Delphi consensus methodology. Results STOPPFrail version 2 emphasises the importance of shared decision-making in the deprescribing process. A new method for identifying older people who are likely to be approaching end-of-life is included along with 25 deprescribing criteria. Guidance relating to the deprescribing of antihypertensive therapies, anti-anginal medications and vitamin D preparations comprises the new criteria. Conclusions STOPPFrail criteria have been updated to assist physicians in efforts to reduce drug-related morbidity and burden for their frailest older patients. Version 2 is based on an up-to-date literature review and consensus validation by a panel of experts.

Introduction Medications are major cost drivers in the treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Recent analyses suggest that there is no added efficacy in continuing nor harm in stopping 5-aminosalicylate (ASA) therapy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease escalated to biological therapies or tofacitinib. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of discontinuing 5-ASA therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis on biological therapies or tofacitinib, compared with continuing 5-ASA therapy. Methods We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of 5-ASA with biologic therapy and tofacitinib compared with the same treatment without 5-ASA. Our primary outcome was to determine whether biologic/tofacitinib monotherapy was cost-effective compared with biologic/tofacitinib and 5-ASA combination therapy using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at a willingness to pay of $50,000/quality-adjusted life year. Owing to the uncertainty surrounding outcome probabilities, probabilistic sensitivity analyses with 10,000 simulations were also performed. We conducted a sensitivity analysis comparing biologic/tofacitinib and 5-ASA therapy compared with biologic/tofacitinib monotherapy, whereby vedolizumab was the first biologic used, followed by infliximab and finally tofacitinib. Results Our model shows that biologic/tofacitinib monotherapy dominates (cheaper and more effective) combination therapy of biologics/tofacitinib with 5-ASA. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses simulations resulted in biologic/tofacitinib monotherapy dominating 100% of the scenarios, with mean cost savings of $24,483.01 over 2 years. When vedolizumab was the first-line therapy in the sensitivity analysis, biologic/tofacitinib monotherapy continued to dominate the combination of 5-ASA and biologic/tofacitinib therapy. Discussion This analysis in patients with ulcerative colitis who require treatment with biologics or tofacitinib demonstrates that continuing 5-ASA therapy is not a cost-effective strategy. Discontinuation of 5-ASA therapy in these patients is safe and less expensive and should be recommended.

Rheumatology practice, during Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, has faced multifaceted challenges. Rheumatologists routinely prescribe immunosuppressant medications to their patients with multisystem autoimmune rheumatic diseases who are concerned about the increased risk of acquiring COVID-19 infection and are anxious to know if they should continue or hold these medications. Rheumatologists are often inundated by calls from their patients and physician colleagues caring for COVID-19 patients in hospitals, about how to manage the immunosuppression. Physicians face the challenging task of keeping up with the most up-to-date information on COVID-19. There are uncertainties about the mode of spread, clinical features, management options as well as long-term complications of COVID-19. Data are rapidly evolving and different studies on treatment options are showing contradictory results. It is known that viral illnesses can trigger a flare-up of underlying rheumatic disease that was previously in remission. To further complicate the scenario, some of the immunosuppressants have shown to have antiviral properties. This has created dilemma in the light of current COVID-19 crisis, as whether to continue or stop the immunosuppressive agents which could be essential to prevent complications of the rheumatic diseases including organ failure but also there is concern about acquiring COVID-19 or developing serious infection. Until we get an effective vaccine, immunosuppressant management for rheumatic diseases as well as other autoimmune diseases and transplants will pose difficult questions. This article is an attempt to review and understand COVID-19 and its impact on the immune system with special emphasis on managing medications used for autoimmune rheumatic diseases. We have provided general guidance about decision making, in regards to the immunosuppressive agents used in rheumatology practice with an understanding that this may change in near future.

The majority of patients diagnosed with cancer are aged over 65 years and have two or more chronic conditions in addition to cancer and the risk of chronic conditions increases further after cancer. The presence of multimorbidity adds complexity to care, as patients' goals of care and the focus of treatment can change with a diagnosis of cancer. Multimorbidity is frequently associated with polypharmacy, the use of potentially inappropriate medications, the presence of adverse drug reactions and potential drug-drug interactions: all of which impact on health outcomes and the cost of care. Consequently, it is vital that a systematic approach is taken to regularly review cancer patients' medication regimens to ensure that they support an optimal balance of benefits with acceptable levels of harm. Several patient and clinician resources are presented to guide the process of medication review and deprescribing.

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2, has led to the death of hundreds of thousands of people worldwide. If infected, older individuals and those with diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease and compromised immune systems are at higher risk for unfavorable outcomes. These comorbidities are prevalent in patients with kidney disease, hence the significant burden of COVID-19 on kidney transplant programs. Multiple case series of kidney transplant recipients with COVID-19 have shown increased mortality compared to non-transplant patients. To-date, we do not have high-level evidence to inform immunosuppression minimization strategies in infected transplant recipients. Most centers however have adopted early anti-metabolite withdrawal in addition to other interventions. This review summarizes the published COVID-19 literature as it relates to outcomes and immunosuppression management in kidney transplant recipients. It also discusses challenges pertaining to pre-transplant evaluation and wait-listed patients.