Interventions to deprescribe potentially inappropriate medications in the elderly: Lost in translation?

Andrew D Baumgartner, Collin M Clark, Susan A LaValley, Scott V Monte, Robert G Wahler Jr, Ranjit Singh, Andrew D Baumgartner, Collin M Clark, Susan A LaValley, Scott V Monte, Robert G Wahler Jr, Ranjit Singh

Abstract

What is known and objective: Use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) remains common in older adults, despite the easy availability of screening tools such as the Beers and Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria. Multiple published studies have implemented these screening tools to encourage deprescribing of PIMs, with mixed results. Little is known about the reasons behind the success or failure of these interventions, or what could be done to improve their impact. Implementation science (IS) provides a set of theories, models and frameworks to address these questions. The goal of this study was to conduct a focused narrative review of the deprescribing literature through an IS lens-to determine the extent to which implementation factors were identified and the intermediate steps in the intervention were measured. A better understanding of the existing literature, including its gaps, may provide a roadmap for future research.

Methods: PubMed search from 2000-2019 using appropriate MeSH headings.

Inclusion criteria: controlled trials or prospective cohort studies intended to reduce PIMs in the elderly that used hospitalizations and/or emergency department visits as outcome measures. Studies were reviewed to identify potential implementation factors (known as determinants), using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) as a guide. In addition, intermediate outcomes were extracted.

Results and discussion: Of the 548 reviewed abstracts, 14 studies met the inclusion criteria and underwent detailed analysis. Of the 14 studies, 10 acknowledged potential implementation determinants that could be mapped onto CFIR. The most commonly identified determinant was the degree of pharmacist integration into the medical team (seven of 14 studies), which mapped onto the CFIR construct of 'networks and communication'. Several important CFIR constructs were absent in the reviewed literature. Intermediate measures were captured by 12 of the 14 reviewed papers, but the choice of measures was inconsistent across studies.

What is new and conclusion: In recent high-quality studies of deprescribing interventions, we found limited acknowledgement of factors known to be important to successful implementation and inconsistent reporting of intermediate outcomes. These findings indicate missed opportunities to understand the factors underlying study outcomes. As a result, we run the risk of rejecting worthwhile interventions due to negative results, when the correct interpretation might be that they failed in implementation. In other words, they were 'lost in translation'. Studies that rigorously examine and report on the implementation process are needed to tease apart this important distinction.

Keywords: adverse event; appropriateness; beers criteria; clinical pharmacy; consolidated framework for implementation research; deprescribing; elderly; guideline adherence; implementation science; pharmacy practice; physician; polypharmacy; potentially inappropriate medications; prescribing practices.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest:

No conflicts of interest have been declared

© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

References

    1. Davidoff AJ, et al., Prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults using the 2012 Beers criteria. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2015. 63(3): p. 486–500.
    1. Dunn RL, Harrison D, and Ripley TL, The beers criteria as an outpatient screening tool for potentially inappropriate medications. Consult Pharm, 2011. 26(10): p. 754–63.
    1. Cannon KT, Choi MM, and Zuniga MA, Potentially inappropriate medication use in elderly patients receiving home health care: a retrospective data analysis. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother, 2006. 4(2): p. 134–43.
    1. Simon SR, et al., Potentially inappropriate medication use by elderly persons in U.S. Health Maintenance Organizations, 2000–2001. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2005. 53(2): p. 227–32.
    1. Curtis LH, et al., Inappropriate prescribing for elderly Americans in a large outpatient population. Arch Intern Med, 2004. 164(15): p. 1621–5.
    1. Gray SL, et al., Potentially inappropriate medication use in community residential care facilities. Ann Pharmacother, 2003. 37(7–8): p. 988–93.
    1. Sloane PD, et al., Inappropriate medication prescribing in residential care/assisted living facilities. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2002. 50(6): p. 1001–11.
    1. Golden AG, et al., Inappropriate medication prescribing in homebound older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc, 1999. 47(8): p. 948–53.
    1. Willcox SM, Himmelstein DU, and Woolhandler S, Inappropriate drug prescribing for the community-dwelling elderly. Jama, 1994. 272(4): p. 292–6.
    1. American Geriatrics Society 2019 Updated AGS Beers Criteria(R) for Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use in Older Adults. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2019.
    1. O’Mahony D, et al., STOPP/START criteria for potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people: version 2. Age Ageing, 2015. 44(2): p. 213–8.
    1. Dills H, et al., Deprescribing Medications for Chronic Diseases Management in Primary Care Settings: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Am Med Dir Assoc, 2018.
    1. Gray SL, et al., Meta-analysis of Interventions to Reduce Adverse Drug Reactions in Older Adults. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2018. 66(2): p. 282–288.
    1. Cooper JA, et al., Interventions to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy in older people: a Cochrane systematic review. BMJ Open, 2015. 5(12): p. e009235.
    1. Rankin A, et al., Interventions to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy for older people. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2018(9).
    1. Nilsen P, Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implement Sci, 2015. 10: p. 53.
    1. Proctor E, et al., Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Administration and policy in mental health, 2011. 38(2): p. 65–76.
    1. Damschroder LJ, et al., Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science . Implement Sci, 2009. 4: p. 50.
    1. Kirk MA, et al., A systematic review of the use of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Implementation Science, 2016. 11(1): p. 72.
    1. Onder G, et al., Strategies to reduce the risk of iatrogenic illness in complex older adults. Age Ageing, 2013. 42(3): p. 284–91.
    1. Effect of a ward-based pharmacy team on preventable adverse drug events in surgical patients (SUREPILL study). Br J Surg, 2015. 102(10): p. 1204–12.
    1. Farris KB, et al., Effect of a care transition intervention by pharmacists: an RCT. BMC Health Serv Res, 2014. 14: p. 406.
    1. Kjeldsen LJ, et al., Evaluation of a controlled, national collaboration study on a clinical pharmacy service of screening for risk medications. Int J Clin Pharm, 2014. 36(2): p. 368–76.
    1. Mannheimer B, et al., Drug-related problems and pharmacotherapeutic advisory intervention at a medicine clinic. Eur J Clin Pharmacol, 2006. 62(12): p. 1075–81.
    1. Marusic S, et al., The effect of pharmacotherapeutic counseling on readmissions and emergency department visits. Int J Clin Pharm, 2013. 35(1): p. 37–44.
    1. Leendertse AJ, et al., Preventing hospital admissions by reviewing medication (PHARM) in primary care: an open controlled study in an elderly population. J Clin Pharm Ther, 2013. 38(5): p. 379–87.
    1. Lenander C, et al., Effects of a pharmacist-led structured medication review in primary care on drug-related problems and hospital admission rates: a randomized controlled trial. Scand J Prim Health Care, 2014. 32(4): p. 180–6.
    1. Touchette DR, et al., Safety-focused medication therapy management: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003), 2012 52(5): p. 603–12.
    1. Donovan JL, et al., A Pilot Health Information Technology-Based Effort to Increase the Quality of Transitions From Skilled Nursing Facility to Home: Compelling Evidence of High Rate of Adverse Outcomes. J Am Med Dir Assoc, 2016. 17(4): p. 312–7.
    1. Lapane KL, et al., Effect of a pharmacist-led multicomponent intervention focusing on the medication monitoring phase to prevent potential adverse drug events in nursing homes. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2011. 59(7): p. 1238–45.
    1. Bos JM, et al., A multifaceted intervention to reduce drug-related complications in surgical patients. Br J Clin Pharmacol, 2017. 83(3): p. 664–677.
    1. Lenssen R, et al., Comprehensive pharmaceutical care to prevent drug-related readmissions of dependent-living elderly patients: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Geriatr, 2018. 18(1): p. 135.
    1. Gustafsson M, et al., Pharmacist participation in hospital ward teams and hospital readmission rates among people with dementia: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Clin Pharmacol, 2017. 73(7): p. 827–835.
    1. Campins L, et al., Randomized controlled trial of an intervention to improve drug appropriateness in community-dwelling polymedicated elderly people. Fam Pract, 2017. 34(1): p. 36–42.
    1. Stein Ken, et al., An Implementation Science Perspective on Deprescribing. Public Policy & Aging Report, 2018. 28(4): p. 134–139.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe