Search

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are a class of drugs that have revolutionized the treatment of upper digestive tract diseases. Their appearance contributed considerably to the marked decrease in complications following bleeding of upper digestive origin. There is also an excessive and even unnecessary use of these drugs. The present work aims to discuss the rational and effective use of proton pump inhibitors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Polypharmacy is often required for older adults with hypertension, and excessive treatment is associated with a high risk of adverse reactions, including hypotension. Aim: To evaluate the deprescribing of antihypertensive medications guided by pharmacists using home blood pressure monitoring in older adults with hypotension. Method: A subgroup of older adults with signs or symptoms of hypotension, included in the MINOR clinical trial, was analysed. In the MINOR procedures, each patient was provided with a device to conduct blood pressure measurement at home for 1 week, following which a report was generated and shared with pharmacists (intervention group) or family physicians (control group). In the intervention group, a pharmacist suggested optimising pharmacotherapy; meanwhile, in the control group, a family physician alone determined the necessary treatment adjustments. Differences in mean blood pressure, the patients with symptoms/signs of hypotension, and the antihypertensive medication deprescribing between both groups were analysed. Results: Seventy-two patients were evaluated (35, control group; 37, intervention group). The intervention group showed a significant reduction in medication prescriptions (− 28.6%; P < 0.001), especially beta-blockers (− 74.2%), loop diuretics (− 83.3%), and aldosterone antagonists (− 80%). The mean office blood pressure in the intervention group increased (14.1 mmHg systolic and 6.9 mmHg diastolic), remaining below the target range (140/90 mmHg). The intervention group showed a significantly reduction in hypotensive symptoms than the control group (64.9% vs. 20%) (P < 0.001). Conclusion: The data highlight an important role for pharmacists in optimizing hypertension management in older people. Deprescribing antihypertensives can limit symptomatic hypotension. Trial Registration: Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov under number NCT04861727. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Despite being cornerstone medications for managing gastrointestinal disorders, proton pump inhibitors (PPI) have raised concerns due to inappropriate prescribing and overutilization, their potential side effects, and interactions with other medications. General practitioners (GPs) provide long-term patient follow-up and are targets to promote PPI deprescribing to reach the widest possible population. GPs practicing in rural settings encounter unique challenges as their numbers dwindle and their workload increases. Hence, targeted educational interventions are crucial to promote appropriate prescribing practices in such underserved areas. Methods We developed a continuing medical education (CME) program focused on PPI deprescribing for GPs in rural settings. The program comprised of an interactive training session featuring clinical cases, an open discussion, and distribution of educational materials. We assessed the program’s effectiveness using a two-level Kirkpatrick model, evaluating participant satisfaction and knowledge levels through pre- and post-course questionnaires. Results Thirty-three GPs participated, with 61.9% working in semi-rural and 38.1% in rural areas (21 responded to the 1st questionnaire, 14 to the 2nd ). Median medical experience was 6 years, with 61.9% serving as internship supervisors. Despite 95.2% acknowledging PPI overprescription, none had previously participated in dedicated PPI CME programs. The open discussion session provided valuable insights into various topics related to PPI use and gastrointestinal health. Participants expressed high satisfaction with the program (average rating of 9.1/10) and 92.9% reported changes in practice, including increased awareness of inappropriate PPI prescriptions. Indeed, 92.9% of GPs identified inappropriate PPI use following the course. 57.1% of participants utilized the provided educational materials. The main practice changes observed included an increased reassessment rate of PPI indications (71.4% at each renewal after vs. 19% before, 28.6% non-systematically after vs. 66.8% before, 0% rarely after vs. 14.3% before; p = 0.006), the necessity for more than one consultation to deprescribe (64.3% after vs. 23.8% before; p = 0.021), systematic utilization of gradual cessation of PPI (100% vs. 61.9%; p = 0.039) and more frequent use of additional medication (92.9% vs. 57.1%; p = 0.022), primarily antiacids (92.3%). Conclusions Our study underscores the effectiveness of targeted CME programs in promoting appropriate prescribing practices and enhancing knowledge among GPs in rural settings. Despite the challenges encountered in deprescribing PPI, the program facilitated proactive approaches in managing treatment discontinuation failures. Tailored educational interventions are essential for mitigating medication prescribing challenges and improving patient outcomes in rural primary care settings. Trial registrations Not applicable.

Background: Despite being cornerstone medications for managing gastrointestinal disorders, proton pump inhibitors (PPI) have raised concerns due to inappropriate prescribing and overutilization, their potential side effects, and interactions with other medications. General practitioners (GPs) provide long-term patient follow-up and are targets to promote PPI deprescribing to reach the widest possible population. GPs practicing in rural settings encounter unique challenges as their numbers dwindle and their workload increases. Hence, targeted educational interventions are crucial to promote appropriate prescribing practices in such underserved areas. Methods: We developed a continuing medical education (CME) program focused on PPI deprescribing for GPs in rural settings. The program comprised of an interactive training session featuring clinical cases, an open discussion, and distribution of educational materials. We assessed the program's effectiveness using a two-level Kirkpatrick model, evaluating participant satisfaction and knowledge levels through pre- and post-course questionnaires. Results: Thirty-three GPs participated, with 61.9% working in semi-rural and 38.1% in rural areas (21 responded to the 1st questionnaire, 14 to the 2nd). Median medical experience was 6 years, with 61.9% serving as internship supervisors. Despite 95.2% acknowledging PPI overprescription, none had previously participated in dedicated PPI CME programs. The open discussion session provided valuable insights into various topics related to PPI use and gastrointestinal health. Participants expressed high satisfaction with the program (average rating of 9.1/10) and 92.9% reported changes in practice, including increased awareness of inappropriate PPI prescriptions. Indeed, 92.9% of GPs identified inappropriate PPI use following the course. 57.1% of participants utilized the provided educational materials. The main practice changes observed included an increased reassessment rate of PPI indications (71.4% at each renewal after vs. 19% before, 28.6% non-systematically after vs. 66.8% before, 0% rarely after vs. 14.3% before; p = 0.006), the necessity for more than one consultation to deprescribe (64.3% after vs. 23.8% before; p = 0.021), systematic utilization of gradual cessation of PPI (100% vs. 61.9%; p = 0.039) and more frequent use of additional medication (92.9% vs. 57.1%; p = 0.022), primarily antiacids (92.3%). Conclusions: Our study underscores the effectiveness of targeted CME programs in promoting appropriate prescribing practices and enhancing knowledge among GPs in rural settings. Despite the challenges encountered in deprescribing PPI, the program facilitated proactive approaches in managing treatment discontinuation failures. Tailored educational interventions are essential for mitigating medication prescribing challenges and improving patient outcomes in rural primary care settings. Trial registrations: Not applicable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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

The global increase of aging with the related increase of multiple noncommunicable diseases is inevitably accompanied by the associated issue of multimorbidity and polypharmacy. The latter is not without peculiar consequences on health, because it has been shown to be associated with drug-related adverse events, mainly due to poor prescription appropriateness and drug–drug interactions. To contribute to tackle this gigantic problem, a registry of drug dispensation in hospitalized older patient has been initiated in Italy in 2008. Through the last 15 years, data on nearly 11,000 older people have been accrued during their hospital stay in internal medicine and geriatric wards. This review article summarizes the main findings obtained, and how these data contribute to tackle the issue of appropriateness of drug prescription and the need of deprescribing in hospitalized older people affected by the most common noncommunicable diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are largely used for controlling various pain conditions and are widely available in community pharmacies, with and without prescription. Despite their effectiveness, NSAIDs can pose significant risks due to potential side effects and drug interactions, particularly in polypharmacy and comorbidity contexts and for vulnerable users. This study investigated whether and how NSAIDs deprescribing can be conducted at the community pharmacy level by assessing pharmacists' confidence, attitudes, and potential barriers and facilitators. Additionally, we aimed to identify any deprescribing guidelines that pharmacists could use. A literature search and a cross-sectional digital questionnaire targeting community pharmacists in Norway were conducted. Results showed that study participants (N = 73) feel confident in identifying needs for deprescribing NSAIDs but barriers such as time constraints, lack of financial compensation, and communication challenges were noted. Participants reported positive attitudes toward deprescribing but highlighted a need for better guidelines and training. This study highlights a gap in specific guidelines for deprescribing NSAIDs and a potential for enhancing pharmacists' roles in the deprescribing process, for example, through training and improved financial incentives. Further research is encouraged to develop concrete strategies for an effective implementation where community pharmacists can be involved in the deprescribing of NSAIDs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract This study aims to analyze the existence of information about deprescription in the leaflets of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) medications. The leaflets available on the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (ANVISA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) websites for the following medications were analyzed: omeprazole, esomeprazole, lansoprazole, dexlansoprazole, pantoprazole, and rabeprazole. The variables collected in each leaflet were the existence: a) about deprescribing; b) of guidance on the deprescription process; c) maximum recommended time for use; and d) risk of prolonged use. This information was analyzed in accordance with the PPI deprescription guideline, from Canada. Regarding the medication leaflets, 83.33 % from ANVISA and 100 % from the FDA did not present explicit and systematic guidance on deprescribing. Regarding the maximum time of use, 100 % of the leaflets from both agencies contained this information. Regarding the risks of prolonged use of the medication, 33.33 % of the ANVISA leaflets and 33.3 % of the FDA leaflets did not report the increased risks described in the guideline. The results highlight a large gap in information about deprescribing in PPI leaflets; this highlighting is necessary to contribute to the promotion of the rational use of medicines.

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

Polypharmacy in the context of medicines means the prescription, dispensing, or use of multiple medications simultaneously. The correct characterization of a particular patient’s prescription or use of a medicine allows the appropriate change to be chosen. Rational pharmacotherapy aims to minimize the medication-related burden, which requires controlled and often longer-lasting intervention and gradually implemented changes in the therapy of a particular patient based on individually assessed and identified drug-related problems. For example, deprescribing options can reduce inappropriate polypharmacy by targeting medicines that occur in prescribing cascades and using comprehensive approaches and concepts. The paper presents the prescribing cascades and the possibilities of their solution within the framework of pharmacotherapy optimization, characterizing the concepts and campaigns “Less is More”, “Choose Wisely”, and “Patient pathway”. The recommendations and warnings formulated within these concepts and campaigns aim to focus the attention of healthcare professionals on the importance of evaluating and considering the necessity of their interventions. They should prioritize value-based care and avoid overloading patients with diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives and methods: This observational pilot study carried out among residents aged 65 and over in a residential facility for dependent elderly people had the following objectives: determine the rate of acceptance by doctors of the pharmacist's deprescribing proposals; draw up the map of the incriminated drugs and the reasons according to the Stop/Start list; and test deprescribing support. Results: Of the 152 proposals concerning 93 patients, the acceptance rate is 45.4%, which varies greatly depending on the drugs and doctors. Proton pump inhibitors and benzodiazepines total more than half of the proposals (56.6%). The main reasons are the lack of indication (proton pump inhibitors) and use beyond 4 weeks (benzodiazepines). Statins and antiplatelet/anticoagulants are also affected. Conclusion: Deprescribing makes pharmacists partners of doctors in health establishments. In view of drug iatrogenics linked to polypharmacy, deprescribing should be a priority for any health authority. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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

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.

Geriatric Cardiology was born as a need for the comprehensive, individualized, holistic, strategic evaluation of the elderly, in itself heterogeneous; in conjunction with their geriatric syndromes such as frailty, cognitive impairment, sarcopenia, physical dysfunction, falls; in addition to its multimorbidity, its polypharmacy; with respect to cardiovascular diseases such as heart failure, atrial fibrillation, coronary disease, valvular disorders; ethereal population, which in many clinical trials have been excluded, and do not have a representativeness in the development of the current clinical guidelines for the correct diagnosis, evaluation and treatment of said cardiovascular diseases; Geriatric cardiology is therefore collaborative, it is multidisciplinary, it prioritizes quality of life more than longevity in the patient, based on geriatric principles with the implementation of scales to assess frailty, cognition, malnutrition, depression; that will help decision-making about the performance of cardiovascular procedures to operations or pharmacological treatments; that could worsen the morbidity and mortality of an older adult; help the process of deprescription, palliative care or care at the end of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1) elicit substantial reductions in glycemia and body weight in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity, but existing data suggest the therapy must be continued indefinitely to maintain clinical improvements. Given the high cost and poor real-world persistence of GLP-1, an effective therapy that enables deprescription with sustained clinical improvements would be beneficial. Thus, the purpose of this real-world study was to assess the effect of GLP-1 deprescription on glycemia and body weight following co-therapy with carbohydrate restricted nutrition therapy (CRNT) supported via telemedicine in a continuous remote care model. Methods: A retrospective, propensity score matched cohort study among patients with T2D at a telemedicine clinic was conducted. Patients in whom GLP-1 were deprescribed (DeRx; n = 154) were matched 1:1 with patients in whom GLP-1 were continued (Rx). HbA1c and body weight at enrollment in clinic (pre-CRNT), at date of deprescription or index date (derx/ID), and at 6 and 12 months (m) post-derx/ID were utilized in this study. Results: No regression in weight was observed following deprescription with > 70% maintaining ≥ 5% weight loss 12 m post-derx/ID. HbA1c rose 6 m and 12 m post-derx/ID in both DeRx and Rx cohorts, but most patients maintained HbA1c < 6.5%. HbA1c and body weight measured 6 m and 12 m following derx/ID did not significantly differ between cohorts and were improved at derx/ID and at follow-up intervals compared to pre-CRNT. Conclusion: These results demonstrate the potential for an alternate therapy, such as CRNT supported via telemedicine, to enable maintenance of weight loss and glycemia below therapeutic targets following discontinuation of GLP-1 therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key summary points: Aim: To study the prevalence and indication for benzodiazepines (BZD) usage in older adults admitted to an acute geriatric unit. To analyze changes made to that treatment at discharge and to check its reintroduction 3 months later. Findings: A quarter of patients took BZD chronically, most of them with no clinical indication. Upon discharge, BZD were discontinued or reduced in most patients. However, this process is not continued in the outpatient setting. Message: The process of deprescribing BZD is complex and challenging as our study underscores. Hospitalization in an acute geriatric unit may be an opportunity to start deprescription. Nevertheless, it is essential to implement general recommendations to continue this process after discharge. Aim: To investigate the prevalence and indications of benzodiazepines (BZD) usage among patients admitted to an acute geriatric unit and assess changes in prescriptions. Methods: BZD indications were documented reviewing clinical records, with appropriateness assessed based on the STOPP–START criteria. Changes in BZD prescriptions were recorded at discharge and 3 months later. Results: Among the 366 patients included (mean age: 92.8 years, 68% females), 91 (24.9%) were on BZD upon admission, being inappropriate in 93.4%. At discharge, BZD discontinuation was observed in 40.7% and dose reduction initiated in 57.4%. Among patients discharged without prescriptions, 10.8% resumed their use at 3 months. Of those discharged with BZD tapering, 74.1% were still on them 3 months later. Conclusions: The majority of patients employing BZD lacked a medical indication. Admission to a geriatric ward resulted in successful discontinuation or dose reduction for most patients but was not maintained in the outpatient setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Actualités Pharmaceutiques is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

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

Copyright of Actualités Pharmaceutiques is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

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

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

ABSTRACT Background: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely prescribed worldwide, often resulting in their overuse. Consequently, it is essential to identify the likely causes of this overuse to facilitate their appropriate prescription. Objective: This study aims to assess physician prescribing patterns, their knowledge of PPIs, and factors affecting their knowledge. Methods: An online survey was conducted among Latin American and Spanish physicians, collecting the following data: professional information, patterns of PPI usage, familiarity with published evidence, and the management approach in three hypothetical case-scenarios. Participant knowledge was categorized as sufficient or insufficient based on the results of the case scenarios. Subsequently, subgroup analysis was performed based on physician training level, years in practice, specialty, and time since the last PPI literature review. Results: A total of 371 physicians participated in the survey. Thirty-eight percent frequently prescribe PPIs, primarily for prophylactic purposes (57.9%). Eighty percent were unfamiliar with PPI deprescribing strategies, and 54.4% rarely reviewed the ongoing indication of patients taking a PPI. Sixty-four percent demonstrated sufficient knowledge in the case-scenarios. A significant association was observed between specialty type (medical vs surgical: 69.4% vs 46.8%, P5 years: 71.4% vs 58.7%, P=0.010), and sufficient knowledge. Conclusion: While most participants prescribed PPIs regularly and for prophylaxis purposes, the majority were unfamiliar with deprescribing strategies and rarely reviewed ongoing indications. Sufficient knowledge is correlated with recent literature reviews and medical specialty affiliation.

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy / Journal Canadien de la Pharmacie Hospitalière is the property of Canadian Society of Hospital Pharmacists and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are largely used for controlling various pain conditions and are widely available in community pharmacies, with and without prescription. Despite their effectiveness, NSAIDs can pose significant risks due to potential side effects and drug interactions, particularly in polypharmacy and comorbidity contexts and for vulnerable users. This study investigated whether and how NSAIDs deprescribing can be conducted at the community pharmacy level by assessing pharmacists’ confidence, attitudes, and potential barriers and facilitators. Additionally, we aimed to identify any deprescribing guidelines that pharmacists could use. A literature search and a cross-sectional digital questionnaire targeting community pharmacists in Norway were conducted. Results showed that study participants (N = 73) feel confident in identifying needs for deprescribing NSAIDs but barriers such as time constraints, lack of financial compensation, and communication challenges were noted. Participants reported positive attitudes toward deprescribing but highlighted a need for better guidelines and training. This study highlights a gap in specific guidelines for deprescribing NSAIDs and a potential for enhancing pharmacists’ roles in the deprescribing process, for example, through training and improved financial incentives. Further research is encouraged to develop concrete strategies for an effective implementation where community pharmacists can be involved in the deprescribing of NSAIDs.

Copyright of Actualités Pharmaceutiques is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Consolidated and reliable evidence regarding the effectiveness of pharmacist interventions for deprescribing benzodiazepines in older outpatients is lacking. Aim: This study evaluated and summarized the impact of pharmacist interventions on benzodiazepine deprescribing among older outpatients. Method: A literature search was conducted until August 2022 in PubMed, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. The review included randomized controlled trials that assessed the impact of pharmacist interventions on deprescribing benzodiazepine in older outpatients. Two independent investigators conducted the study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effect models in the RStudio software. Results: A total of 893 records were identified. Five studies, including 3,879 patients, met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. All five studies used health education as an intervention strategy, and three also conducted medication reviews. There was no evidence of the pharmacist's authority to modify prescriptions during benzodiazepine deprescribing. One study was classified as having a low risk of bias, whereas the other had some concerns or a high risk of bias. Three studies were included in the meta-analysis and a significant impact of pharmacist interventions on benzodiazepines deprescribing rates in older outpatients was observed (RR = 2.75 [95%CI 1.29; 5.89]; p = 0.04; I2 = 69%; low certainty of evidence). Conclusion: Pharmacists may contribute to deprescribing benzodiazepines in older outpatients. Further studies are needed to increase the reliability of these findings. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022358563. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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

Background and objective: There are barriers to deprescription that hinder its implementation in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to analyse the main barriers and limitations of the deprescription process perceived by physicians who care for multipathological patients. Materials and methods: The "deprescription questionnaire of elderly patients" was adapted to an online format and sent to physicians in geriatrics. Question 1 is a reference to establish agreement or disagreement with this practice. The influence of different aspects of deprescription was analysed via the demographic characteristics of the clinicians and perceptions of the various barriers (questions 2–9) by means of bivariate analysis. Based on the latter, a multivariate model was carried out to demonstrate the relationship between barriers and the degree of deprescription agreement among respondents. Results: Of the 72 respondents, 72.2% were in favour of deprescribing. Regarding the analyses, the demographic characteristics did not influence rankings. The deprescription of preventive drugs and consensus with patients were associated with a positive attitude towards deprescribing, while withdrawing drugs prescribed by other professionals, time constraints and patient reluctance emerged as possible barriers. The only factor independently associated with deprescribing was lack of time. Conclusions: Time was found to be the main barrier to deprescription. Training, the creation of multidisciplinary teams and integrated health systems are key facilitators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Opioid deprescription is the process of supervised tapering and safe withdrawal when a potentially inappropriate use is detected. This represents a challenge in chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) patients who may respond differently to the procedure. Our aim was to analyze the potential impact of CYP2D6 phenotypes and sex on the clinical and safety outcomes during an opioid use disorder (OUD) tapering process. Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted on CNCP ambulatory OUD patients (cases, n = 138) who underwent a 6-month opioid dose reduction and discontinuation. Pain intensity, relief and quality of life (Visual analogue scale, VAS 0-100 mm), global activity (GAF, 0-100 scores), morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD), analgesic drugs adverse events (AEs) and opioid withdrawal syndrome (OWS, 0-96 scores) were recorded at basal and final visits. Sex differences and CYP2D6 phenotypes (poor (PM), extensive (EM) and ultrarapid (UM) metabolizers based on CYP2D6*1, *2, *3, *4, *5, *6, *10, *17, *41, 2D6*5, 2D6 × N, 2D6*4 × 2 gene variants) were analyzed. Results: Although CYP2D6-UM consumed three-times less basal MEDD [40 (20-123) mg/day, p = 0.04], they showed the highest number of AEs [7 (6-11), p = 0.02] and opioid withdrawal symptoms (46 ± 10 scores, p = 0.01) after deprescription. This was inversely correlated with their quality of life (r = -0.604, p < 0.001). Sex-differences were evidenced with a tendency to a lower analgesic tolerability in females and lower quality of life in men. Discussion: These data support the potential benefits of CYP2D6-guided opioid deprescription, in patients with CNCP when OUD is detected. Further studies are required to understand a sex/gender interaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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

Over 70% of care home residents are prescribed potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) associated with morbidity and mortality. Deprescribing is a common recommendation by pharmacists performing medication reviews in care homes, however requiring prescriber authorisation is a barrier. Care home Independent Pharmacist Prescribing Study (CHIPPS), a cluster randomised control trial integrated pharmacist independent prescriber (PIPs) into care homes to improve medication management, providing a unique opportunity to identify their barriers and enablers to deprescribing. To identify barriers and enablers to PIPs deprescribing medications in care homes. Secondary qualitative framework analysis was performed on interviews with CHIPPS' PIPs. A maximum variation sampling approach was used to select from the 14 PIPs included in the process evaluation to achieve diversity of PIPs' contextual factors e.g., previous experience in care homes. Transcripts were coded inductively for barriers and enablers to deprescribing and then mapped to Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Eleven PIP's interviews were sampled. Factors acted as enablers and barriers were PIP relationship with General Practitioner (GP), care home staff and residents/families, awareness of the PIP role and family trust in PIPs' deprescribing activities (social influences) ; PIPs' independent prescribing confidence, previous experience and ability dealing with residents' medications (beliefs about capabilities) ; understanding of PIP role and PIP confidence in their role as an independent prescriber (Social/professional role and identity) ; access to residents' records, deprescribing decision support, regular follow-up from care home staff, resident difficulties with medications, teamwork, and time restraints (Environmental context and resources). One factor acted as a barrier: believing negatives of deprescribing outweigh benefits regarding certain medications (Beliefs about consequences). PIPs' involvement in deprescribing within care homes is influenced by multiple barriers and enablers. Data mapped to TDF domains represent barriers that need addressing and enablers that should be highlighted to enhance PIPs' effectiveness in future interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To report, by means of a methodological protocol, the process of deprescribing implemented in a geriatric psychiatry outpatient clinic of a teaching hospital. Methods: The topic of interest was comprehensively reviewed in the scientific literature. Instruments and tools necessary to develop the protocol were selected, including the Treatment Adherence Measure, Beers criteria, the EURO-FORTA List, the Brazilian Consensus on Potentially Inappropriate Medications for Older Persons, Drugs.com, and deprescribing algorithms. Results: The protocol consists of the following steps: 1) Review: Assess older patients' physical and behavioral status and family context and list all medications used; 2) Analyze: Review patients' drug therapy; 3) Act: Initiate deprescribing (if indicated); 4) Adjust: Discuss patients' expectations, beliefs, and preferences and adjust the prescription to their real possibilities; 5) Monitor: Identify responses to treatment, assess adherence to the deprescribing process, and detect return of symptoms or worsening of the underlying disease. Conclusions: Health care professionals need to work together to provide comprehensive care for older persons. The inclusion of deprescribing in more research groups focused on the geriatric population will increase attention to the safety of pharmacological treatment for older patients.

Introduction: Opioid deprescription is the process of supervised tapering and safe withdrawal when a potentially inappropriate use is detected. This represents a challenge in chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) patients who may respond differently to the procedure. Our aim was to analyze the potential impact of CYP2D6 phenotypes and sex on the clinical and safety outcomes during an opioid use disorder (OUD) tapering process.Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted on CNCP ambulatory OUD patients (cases, n = 138) who underwent a 6-month opioid dose reduction and discontinuation. Pain intensity, relief and quality of life (Visual analogue scale, VAS 0–100 mm), global activity (GAF, 0–100 scores), morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD), analgesic drugs adverse events (AEs) and opioid withdrawal syndrome (OWS, 0–96 scores) were recorded at basal and final visits. Sex differences and CYP2D6 phenotypes (poor (PM), extensive (EM) and ultrarapid (UM) metabolizers based on CYP2D6*1, *2, *3, *4, *5, *6, *10, *17, *41, 2D6*5, 2D6 × N, 2D6*4 × 2 gene variants) were analyzed.Results: Although CYP2D6-UM consumed three-times less basal MEDD [40 (20–123) mg/day, p = 0.04], they showed the highest number of AEs [7 (6–11), p = 0.02] and opioid withdrawal symptoms (46 ± 10 scores, p = 0.01) after deprescription. This was inversely correlated with their quality of life (r = −0.604, p < 0.001). Sex-differences were evidenced with a tendency to a lower analgesic tolerability in females and lower quality of life in men.Discussion: These data support the potential benefits of CYP2D6-guided opioid deprescription, in patients with CNCP when OUD is detected. Further studies are required to understand a sex/gender interaction.

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

Background: Benzodiazepines are routinely prescribed for various psychiatric disorders. They are effective for short term management but commonly seen to be prescribed for long term against the recommended guidelines leading to various adverse effects in patients. There is dearth of Indian literature pertaining to prescription as well as deprescribing of benzodiazepines and Z drugs. Aims and Objectives: To assess the prescription pattern of benzodiazepines and Z drugs among patients visiting the department of psychiatry in a tertiary care hospital. Material and Methods: Case record files of patients visiting the inpatient and outpatient setting from 1st January 2017 to 31st December 2017 were retrieved and analysed for sociodemographic and clinical details and prescription of benzodiazepines. Results: A total of 975 records of patients were included in the study. The mean age group was 36.79 + 13.05years. Benzodiazepines prescription was maximum in patients with anxiety spectrum disorders (38.4%). Clonazepam was the most commonly prescribed benzodiazepine (47.%). More than 50 percent of the patients continued to consume benzodiazepines for more than 3 months). There was significant positive association of long term benzodiazepine usage with duration of illness, diagnosis, type of benzodiazepines received and length of outpatient treatment. Conclusion: The study concludes that majority of patients continue to consume benzodiazepines beyond the recommended period of usage. Thus there is a need for structured guidelines for prescribing and deprescribing of benzodiazepines and Z drugs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Actualités Pharmaceutiques is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Actualités Pharmaceutiques is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Historically, research questions have been posed by the pharmaceutical industry or researchers, with little involvement of consumers and healthcare professionals. Objective: To determine what questions about medicine use are important to people living with dementia and their care team and whether they have been previously answered by research. Methods: The James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership process was followed. A national Australian qualitative survey on medicine use in people living with dementia was conducted with consumers (people living with dementia and their carers including family, and friends) and healthcare professionals. Survey findings were supplemented with key informant interviews and relevant published documents (identified by the research team). Conventional content analysis was used to generate summary questions. Finally, evidence checking was conducted to determine if the summary questions were 'unanswered'. Results: A total of 545 questions were submitted by 228 survey participants (151 consumers and 77 healthcare professionals). Eight interviews were conducted with key informants and four relevant published documents were identified and reviewed. Overall, analysis resulted in 68 research questions, grouped into 13 themes. Themes with the greatest number of questions were related to co-morbidities, adverse drug reactions, treatment of dementia, and polypharmacy. Evidence checking resulted in 67 unanswered questions. Conclusion: A wide variety of unanswered research questions were identified. Addressing unanswered research questions identified by consumers and healthcare professionals through this process will ensure that areas of priority are targeted in future research to achieve optimal health outcomes through quality use of medicines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To identify impediments to deprescription among older adults from the perspective of a panel of Brazilian geriatricians. Methods: The Delphi method was used to obtain a consensus among Brazilian geriatricians about the factors that influence the lack of deprescription for older adults in clinical practice. The study was developed in two stages: (i) a survey and description of potential factors involved in deprescription; and (ii) applying the results of the survey to a panel of experts to obtain a consensus. Results: The deprescription process is influenced by the interaction of three pillars of older adult health care: the prescriber, the patient-family, and the health care system. In the professional and health care systems, professional training and communication skills, prolonged clinical follow-up, access to the multidisciplinary team, medical consultations of an adequate time, and unified electronic health records were identified as facilitators of deprescription. In the patient-family pillar, clear facilitators included health literacy, no sensory or cognitive deficits, and a clinical situation of transitional or palliative care. Conclusions: Deprescription is a complex, multifactorial process that requires attention, time, and specific skills and competencies from the attending physician, but it also requires shared decision-making and a health system compatible with a culture of deprescription.

Introduction: Drug–drug interactions (DDIs) represent an important clinical problem, particularly in older patients, due to polytherapy, comorbidity, and physiological changes in pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic pathways. In this study, we investigated the association between drugs prescribed after discharge from the hospital or clinic and the risk of DDIs with drugs used daily by each patient. Methods: We performed an observational, retrospective, multicenter study on the medical records of outpatients referred to general practitioners. DDIs were measured using the drug interaction probability scale. Potential drug interactions were evaluated by clinical pharmacologists (physicians) and neurologists. Collected data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. Results: During the study, we evaluated 1772 medical records. We recorded the development of DDIs in 10.3% of patients; 11.6% of these patients required hospitalization. Logistic regression showed an association among DDIs, sex, and the number of drugs used (p = 0.023). Conclusions: This observational real-life study shows that the risk of DDIs is common in older patients. Physicians must pay more attention after hospital discharge, evaluating the treatment to reduce the risk of DDIs.

Los inhibidores de la bomba de protones (IBP) se encuentran entre los medicamentos más utilizados en el mundo por su bajo costo, extensa prescripción y efectividad. Sin embargo, su uso a largo plazo no es inocuo y aún hay vacíos en el conocimiento del empleo adecuado de estos medicamentos. Por lo tanto, en esta revisión se expone, además de sus propiedades generales, sus verdaderas indicaciones, el uso recomendado a largo plazo y las estrategias para lograr la deprescripción, con el fin de evitar el uso indiscriminado.

Purpose Patients on hemodialysis have a high risk of medication-related problems. Studies using deprescribing algorithms to reduce the number of inappropriate medications in this population have been published, but none have used a patient-partnership approach. Our study evaluated the impact of a similar intervention with a patient-partnership approach. Methods The objective was to describe the implementation of a pharmacist-led intervention with a patient-partnership approach using deprescribing algorithms and its impact on the reduction of inappropriate medications in patients on hemodialysis. Eight algorithms were developed by pharmacists and nephrologists to assess the appropriateness of medications. Pharmacists identified patients taking targeted medications. Following patient enrollment, pharmacists assessed medications with patients and applied the algorithms. With patient consent, deprescription was suggested to nephrologists if applicable. Specific data on each targeted medication were collected at 4 and 16 weeks. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the effects of the deprescribing intervention. Results Of 270 patients, 256 were taking at least one targeted medication. Of the 122 patients taking at least one targeted medication who were approached to participate, 66 were included in the study. At enrollment, these patients were taking 252 targeted medications, of which 59 (23.4%) were determined to be inappropriate. Deprescription was initiated for 35 of these 59 medications (59.3%). At 4 weeks, 33 of the 59 medications (55.9%) were still deprescribed, while, at 16 weeks, 27 of the 59 medications (45.8%) were still deprescribed. Proton pump inhibitors and benzodiazepines or Z-drugs were the most common inappropriate medications, and allopurinol was the most deprescribed medication. Conclusion A pharmacist-led intervention with a patient-partnership approach and using deprescribing algorithms reduced the number of inappropriate medications in patients on hemodialysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Behavioural treatments are recommended first-line for insomnia, but long-term benzodiazepine receptor agonist (BZRA) use remains common and engaging patients in a deprescribing consultation is challenging. Few deprescribing interventions directly target patients. Prescribers' support of patient-targeted interventions may facilitate their uptake. Recently assessed in the Your Answers When Needing Sleep in New Brunswick (YAWNS NB) study, Sleepwell (mysleepwell.ca) was developed as a direct-to-patient behaviour change intervention promoting BZRA deprescribing and non-pharmacological insomnia management. BZRA prescribers of YAWNS NB participants were invited to complete an online survey assessing the acceptability of Sleepwell as a direct-to-patient intervention. The survey was developed using the seven construct components of the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA) framework. Respondents (40/250, 17.2%) indicated high acceptability, with positive responses per TFA construct averaging 32.3/40 (80.7%). Perceived as an ethical, credible, and useful tool, Sleepwell also promoted prescriber-patient BZRA deprescribing engagements (11/19, 58%). Prescribers were accepting of Sleepwell and supported its application as a direct-to-patient intervention.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the presence and quality of content on drug deprescribing in Brazilian package inserts for benzodiazepine drugs. METHODS: Documentary study where we analyzed data on deprescribing extracted from electronic package inserts of drugs containing benzodiazepines; these documents were available at the Brazilian Health Surveillance Agency website. Our search was performed independently by 2 researchers who used the following keywords: “deprescription,” “withdrawal,” and “tapering.” The deprescribing plan, when presented by the package insert, was compared to deprescribing protocols for benzodiazepines found in the literature. Moreover, we assessed the presence of guidance on the maximum length of treatment and risks of long-term use. RESULTS: We found 12 package inserts for benzodiazepines and 100% of them suggested gradual withdrawal; only 1 (8.33%) suggested a systematized deprescribing plan. One document (8.33%) did not offer guidance on maximum treatment duration. Eleven (91.67%) had the information on long-term use possibly causing dependence or tolerance, and 1 (8.33%) did not describe the risks of continuous use. CONCLUSIONS: It is known that benzodiazepines should be withdrawn in a gradual and schematized manner, but package inserts do not currently bring this information in detail. It is of utmost importance that health professionals be educated on their conduct, hence the necessity for updating medication package inserts.

Background: Deprescribing interventions delivered through the electronic medical record have not significantly reduced the use of high‐risk anticholinergics in prior trials. Pharmacists have been identified as ideal practitioners to conduct deprescribing; however, little experience beyond collaborative consult models has been published. Objective: To evaluate the impact of two pilot pharmacist‐based advanced practice models nested within primary care. Methods: Pilot studies of a collaborative clinic‐based pharmacist deprescribing intervention and a telephone‐based pharmacist deprescribing intervention were conducted. Patients receiving the clinic‐based pharmacy model were aged 55 years and older and referred for deprescribing at a specialty clinic. Patients receiving the telephone‐based pharmacy model were aged 65 years and older and called by a clinical pharmacist for deprescribing without referral. Deprescribing was defined as a discontinuation or dose reduction reported either in clinical records or through self‐reporting. Results: The 18 patients receiving clinic‐based deprescribing had a mean age of 68 years and 78% were female. Among 24 medications deemed eligible for deprescribing, 23 (96%) were deprescribed. The clinic‐based deprescribing model resulted in a 93% reduction in median annualized total standardized dose (TSD), 56% lowered their annualized exposure below a cognitive risk threshold, and 4 (17%) of medications were represcribed within 6 months. The 24 patients receiving telephone‐based deprescribing had a mean age of 73 years and 92% were female. Among 24 medications deemed eligible for deprescribing, 12 (50%) were deprescribed. There was no change in the median annualized TSD, the annualized TSD was lowered below a cognitive risk threshold in 46%, and no medications were represcribed within 6 months. Few withdrawal symptoms or adverse events were reported in both groups. Conclusions: Pharmacist‐based deprescribing successfully reduced exposure to high‐risk anticholinergics in primary care older adults, yet further work is needed to understand the impact on clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Resumen: El uso de fármacos conlleva innegables beneficios en las personas mayores, pero no está exento de efectos indeseables. La deprescripción es el proceso de revisión sistemática de la medicación con el objetivo de lograr la mejor relación riesgo-beneficio en base a la mejor evidencia disponible. Este proceso es especialmente importante en mayores polimedicados, sobretratados, frágiles, con enfermedades terminales y en el final de la vida.La deprescripción debe hacerse de forma escalonada, estableciendo un seguimiento estrecho por si aparecen problemas tras la retirada. En la toma de decisiones es muy importante contar con la opinión del paciente y de los cuidadores, valorando los objetivos del tratamiento según la situación clínica, funcional y social del enfermo.Existen múltiples herramientas para facilitar a los clínicos la tarea de seleccionar qué fármacos deprescribir (criterios Beers, STOPP-START…). Los grupos farmacológicos más susceptibles de intervención son: antihipertensivos, antidiabéticos, estatinas, benzodiacepinas, antidepresivos, anticolinérgicos, anticolinesterásicos y neurolépticos. Abstract: The use of drugs has undeniable benefits to the elderly, but it is not exempt from undesirable effects. Deprescription is the process of systematic medication review with the target of achieving the best risk-benefit ratio based on the best available evidence. This process is especially important for polymedicated elderly patients as well as those overtreated, frail, terminally ill and at the end of life.The deprescription must be done in stages, establishing a close follow-up in case problems appear after withdrawal. In the decision-making process, it is very important to consider the patient and caregivers opinion, assessing the objectives of the treatment according to the clinical, functional and social situation of the patient.There are multiple tools to make it easier for clinicians to select which drugs to deprescribe (Beers criteria, STOPP-START…). The most susceptible to intervention pharmacological groups are: antihypertensives, antidiabetics, statins, benzodiazepines, antidepressants, anticholinergics, anticholinesterase agents, and neuroleptics.