194 research outputs found

    Methods to reduce prescribing errors in elderly patients with multimorbidity

    Get PDF
    The global population of multimorbid older people is growing steadily. Multimorbidity is the principal cause of complex polypharmacy, which in turn is the prime risk factor for inappropriate prescribing and adverse drug reactions and events. Those who prescribe for older frailer multimorbid people are particularly prone to committing prescribing errors of various kinds. The causes of prescribing errors in this patient population are multifaceted and complex, including prescribers’ lack of knowledge of aging physiology, geriatric medicine, and geriatric pharmacotherapy, overprescribing that frequently leads to major polypharmacy, inappropriate prescribing, and inappropriate drug omission. This review examines the various ways of minimizing prescribing errors in multimorbid older people. The role of education in physician prescribers and clinical pharmacists, the use of implicit and explicit prescribing criteria designed to improve medication appropriateness in older people, and the application of information and communication-technology systems to minimize errors are discussed in detail. Although evidence to support any single intervention to prevent prescribing errors in multimorbid elderly people is inconclusive or lacking, published data support focused prescriber education in geriatric pharmacotherapy, routine application of STOPP/START (screening tool of older people’s prescriptions/screening tool to alert to right treatment) criteria for potentially inappropriate prescribing, electronic prescribing, and close liaison between clinical pharmacists and physicians in relation to structured medication review and reconciliation. Carrying out a structured medication review aimed at optimizing pharmacotherapy in this vulnerable patient population presents a major challenge. Another challenge is to design, build, validate, and test by clinical trials suitably versatile and efficient software engines that can reliably and swiftly perform complex medication reviews in older multimorbid people. The European Union-funded SENATOR and OPERAM clinical trials commencing in 2016 will examine the impact of customized software engines in reducing medication-related morbidity, avoidable excess cost, and rehospitalization in older multimorbid people

    STOPPFrail [Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in Frail adults with limited life expectancy]: Consensus validation

    Get PDF
    Objective: To validate STOPPFrail, a list of explicit criteria for potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in frail older adults with limited life expectancy.Design: A Delphi consensus survey of an expert panel comprising academic geriatricians, clinical pharmacologists, palliative care physicians, old age psychiatrists, general practitioners and clinical pharmacists.Setting: Ireland.Subjects: Seventeen panellists.Methods: STOPPFrail criteria were initially created by the authors based on clinical experience and literature appraisal. Criteria were organised according to physiological system; each criterion accompanied by an explanation. Using Delphi consensus methodology, panellists ranked their agreement with each criterion on a 5-point Likert scale and provided written feedback. Criteria with a median Likert response of 4/5 (agree/strongly agree) and a 25th centile of ≥4 were included in the final list. Results: All panellists completed 3 Delphi rounds. Thirty criteria were proposed; 27 were accepted. The first two criteria suggest deprescribing medications without indication or where compliance is poor. The remaining 25 criteria include lipid-lowering therapies, alpha-blockers for hypertension, anti-platelets, neuroleptics, memantine, proton-pump-inhibitors, H2-receptor antagonists, anti-spasmodic agents, theophylline, leukotriene antagonists, calcium supplements, bone anti-resorptive therapy, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories, corticosteroids, 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors, alpha-1-selective blockers, muscarinic antagonists, oral diabetic agents, ACE-inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, systemic oestrogens, multivitamins, nutritional supplements and prophylactic antibiotics. Consensus could not be reached on the inclusion of acetyl-cholinesterase inhibitors. Full consensus was reached on exclusion of anticoagulants and anti-depressants from the list.Conclusion: STOPPFrail comprises 27 criteria relating to medications that are potentially inappropriate in frail older patients with limited life expectancy. STOPPFrail may assist physicians in deprescribing medications in these patients.<br/

    First time stroke survivors' perceptions of their health status and their goals for recovery

    Get PDF
    Stroke is an intensely individual, complex and life changing experience. Stroke recovery has many dimensions, and perceptions of health status are thought to affect recovery. The purpose of this qualitative study was to describe patients' perceptions of their health status and their goals for recovery from early post stroke. Following ethical approval, semi structured interviews were conducted with patients (n=10) diagnosed with a first incident of stroke. Time following stroke onset ranged from 4 to 7 days. Gender difference was equal, and mean age of participants was 77 years. Participants considered themselves to be active and in excellent health prior to the stroke onset. All participants perceived that their health had declined since the stroke onset, but they were hopeful for the future. Two distinct themes emerged; "sudden fear and helplessness" and "regaining control in life". Participants reported wanting to quickly return to doing everyday things and identified individual goals for recovery. The patients' experience should be considered early post stroke to provide a complete picture of their role in recovery. Participants believed that the greatest challenge would be testing themselves at home. This study reinforces the importance of engaging with patients early post stroke so that recovery goals are identified that help restore meaning through the re-establishment of previous activities. Patient goals for recovery need to be discussed and devised in conjunction with health care professionals

    Evidence of and recommendations for non-pharmacological interventions for common geriatric conditions: the SENATOR-ONTOP systematic review protocol.

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Non-pharmacological therapies for common chronic medical conditions in older patients are underused in clinical practice. We propose a protocol for the assessment of the evidence of non-pharmacological interventions to prevent or treat relevant outcomes in several prevalent geriatric conditions in order to provide recommendations. Methods and analysis: The conditions of interest for which the evidence about efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions will be searched include delirium, falls, pressure sores, urinary incontinence, dementia, heart failure, orthostatic hypotension, sarcopaenia and stroke. For each condition, the following steps will be undertaken: (A) prioritising clinical questions; (B) retrieving the evidence (MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL and PsychINFO will be searched to identify systematic reviews); (C) assessing the methodological quality of the evidence (risk of bias according to the Cochrane method will be applied to the primary studies retrieved from the systematic reviews); (D) developing recommendations based on the evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) items—risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness and publication bias—will be used to rate the overall evidence and develop recommendations). Dissemination: For each target condition, at least one systematic overview concerning the evidence of non-pharmacological interventions will be produced and published in peer-reviewed journals

    STOPP/START criteria for potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people: version 2

    Get PDF
    Purpose: screening tool of older people’s prescriptions (STOPP) and screening tool to alert to right treatment (START) criteria were first published in 2008. Due to an expanding therapeutics evidence base, updating of the criteria was required. Methods: we reviewed the 2008 STOPP/START criteria to add new evidence-based criteria and remove any obsolete criteria. A thorough literature review was performed to reassess the evidence base of the 2008 criteria and the proposed new criteria. Nineteen experts from 13 European countries reviewed a new draft of STOPP & START criteria including proposed new criteria. These experts were also asked to propose additional criteria they considered important to include in the revised STOPP & START criteria and to highlight any criteria from the 2008 list they considered less important or lacking an evidence base. The revised list of criteria was then validated using the Delphi consensus methodology. Results: the expert panel agreed a final list of 114 criteria after two Delphi validation rounds, i.e. 80 STOPP criteria and 34 START criteria. This represents an overall 31% increase in STOPP/START criteria compared with version 1. Several new STOPP categories were created in version 2, namely antiplatelet/anticoagulant drugs, drugs affecting, or affected by, renal function and drugs that increase anticholinergic burden; new START categories include urogenital system drugs, analgesics and vaccines. Conclusion: STOPP/START version 2 criteria have been expanded and updated for the purpose of minimizing inappropriate prescribing in older people. These criteria are based on an up-to-date literature review and consensus validation among a European panel of experts

    Potentially inappropriate medications defined by STOPP criteria and the risk of adverse drug events in older hospitalized patients

    Get PDF
    Background: Previous studies have not demonstrated a consistent association between potentially inappropriate medicines (PIMs) in older patients as defined by Beers criteria and avoidable adverse drug events (ADEs). This study aimed to assess whether PIMs defined by new STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions) criteria are significantly associated with ADEs in older people with acute illness. Methods: We prospectively studied 600 consecutive patients 65 years or older who were admitted with acute illness to a university teaching hospital over a 4-month interval. Potentially inappropriate medicines were defined by both Beers and STOPP criteria. Adverse drug events were defined by World Health Organization- Uppsala Monitoring Centre criteria and verified by a local expert consensus panel, which also assessed whether ADEs were causal or contributory to current hospitalization. Hallas criteria defined ADE avoidability. We compared the proportions of patients taking Beers criteria PIMs and STOPP criteria PIMs with avoidable ADEs that were causal or contributory to admission. Results: A total of 329 ADEs were detected in 158 of 600 patients (26.3%); 219 of 329 ADEs (66.6%) were considered causal or contributory to admission. Of the 219 ADEs, 151(68.9%) considered causal or contributory to admission were avoidable or potentially avoidable. After adjusting for age, sex, comorbidity, dementia, baseline activities of daily living function, and number of medications, the likelihood of a serious avoidable ADE increased significantly when STOPP PIMs were prescribed (odds ratio, 1.847; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.506-2.264;P<.001);prescription of Beers criteria PIMs did not significantly increase ADE risk (odds ratio, 1.276; 95% CI, 0.945-1.722; P=.11). Conclusion: STOPP criteria PIMs, unlike Beers criteria PIMs, are significantly associated with avoidable ADEs in older people that cause or contribute to urgent hospitalization

    Explicit criteria as clinical tools to minimize inappropriate medication use and its consequences

    Get PDF
    Polypharmacy and prescribing of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are the key elements of inappropriate medication use (IMU) in older multimorbid people. IMU is associated with a range of negative healthcare consequences including adverse drug events and unplanned hospitalizations. Furthermore, prescribing guidelines are commonly derived from randomized controlled clinical trials which have specifically excluded older adults with multimorbidity. Consequently, indiscriminate application of single disease pharmacotherapy guidelines to older multimorbid patients can lead to increased risk of drug?drug interactions, drug?disease interactions and poor drug adherence. Both polypharmacy and PIMs are highly prevalent in older people and strategies to improve the quality and safety of prescribing, largely through avoidance of IMU, are needed. In the last 30?years, numerous explicit PIM criteria-based tools have been developed to assist physicians with medication management in clinically complex multimorbid older people. Very few of these PIM criteria sets have been tested as an intervention compared with standard pharmaceutical care in well-designed clinical trials. In this review, we describe the most widely used sets of explicit PIM criteria to address inappropriate polypharmacy with particular focus on STOPP/START criteria and FORTA criteria which have been associated with positive patient-related outcomes when used as interventions in recent randomized controlled trials

    STOPP/START Criteria and Their Role as a Clinical Tool in Routine Practice

    Get PDF
    Screening Tool of Older Persons’ Prescriptions (STOPP)/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START) criteria was first published in 2008, primarily as an alternative set of explicit criteria for potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) to Beers criteria

    Deprescribing in older people: why it matters in routine clinical practice

    Get PDF

    The effect of SENATOR (Software ENgine for the Assessment and optimisation of drug and non-drug Therapy in Older peRsons) on incident adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in an older hospital cohort - Trial Protocol

    Get PDF
    Background: The aim of this trial is to evaluate the effect of SENATOR software on incident, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in older, multimorbid, hospitalized patients. The SENATOR software produces a report designed to optimize older patients' current prescriptions by applying the published STOPP and START criteria, highlighting drug-drug and drug-disease interactions and providing non-pharmacological recommendations aimed at reducing the risk of incident delirium. Methods: We will conduct a multinational, pragmatic, parallel arm Prospective Randomized Open-label, Blinded Endpoint (PROBE) controlled trial. Patients with acute illnesses are screened for recruitment within 48 h of arrival to hospital and enrolled if they meet the relevant entry criteria. Participants' medical history, current prescriptions, select laboratory tests, electrocardiogram, cognitive status and functional status are collected and entered into a dedicated trial database. Patients are individually randomized with equal allocation ratio. Randomization is stratified by site and medical versus surgical admission, and uses random block sizes. Patients randomized to either arm receive standard routine pharmaceutical clinical care as it exists in each site. Additionally, in the intervention arm an individualized SENATOR-generated medication advice report based on the participant's clinical and medication data is placed in their medical record and a senior medical staff member is requested to review it and adopt any of its recommendations that they judge appropriate. The trial's primary outcome is the proportion of patients experiencing at least one adjudicated probable or certain, non-trivial ADR, during the index hospitalization, assessed at 14 days post-randomization or at index hospital discharge if it occurs earlier. Potential ADRs are identified retrospectively by the site researchers who complete a Potential Endpoint Form (one per type of event) that is adjudicated by a blinded, expert committee. All occurrences of 12 pre-specified events, which represent the majority of ADRs, are reported to the committee along with other suspected ADRs. Participants are followed up 12 (+/- 4) weeks post-index hospital discharge to assess medication quality and healthcare utilization. This is the first clinical trial to examine the effectiveness of a software intervention on incident ADRs and associated healthcare costs during hospitalization in older people with multi-morbidity and polypharmacy
    corecore