Criterios de Beers para identificar el consumo de medicación potencialmente inapropiada: adaptación para su aplicación en Argentina / Beers criteria to identify the consumption of potentially inappropriate medication: adaptation for its application inArgentina

Introducción. Los Criterios de Beers son los más utilizados para evaluar el uso de medicación potencialmente inapropiada en grandes poblaciones, pero no contemplan algunos medicamentos de uso frecuente fuera de los EE.UU. Objetivo. Realizar una adaptación al contexto de Argentina de los Criterios de Beers publicados en 2019. Métodos. Fue elaborada una lista preliminar de medicación potencialmente inapropiada adaptada a la comercialización local, que luego fue consensuada por un panel de expertos (método Delphi). Resultados. De los 112 medicamentos originales listados en la tabla dos de los Criterios de Beers (en forma individual o como grupo), fueron excluidos 36 por no estar disponibles el país y fueron sumados 23 que no se comercializan en los EE.UU. pero sí en Argentina. Luego de dos rondas y de consensuar la suma a esta lista de dos grupos farmacológicos(antimigrañosos y vasodilatadores periféricos), fue acordado el agregado de picosulfato, bisacodilo, senósidos y cáscara sagrada como medicación potencialmente inapropiada en el grupo de agentes contra el estreñimiento, la fluoxetina entre los inhibidores selectivos de la recaptación de serotonina y el Ginkgo biloba como droga contra la demencia. También hubo consenso en advertir el riesgo de hipotensión ortostática asociado a la tamsulosina, en aconsejar la consideración de la carga anticolinérgica total del esquema terapéutico administrado y en recomendar al paracetamol como primera línea de tratamiento del dolor, asociado o no a opioides. Conclusiones. Contar con una versión de los Criterios de Beers 2019 adaptada al contexto de Argentina contribuirá al desarrollo y monitoreo de intervenciones para prevenir y reducir el consumo de medicación potencialmente inapropiada. (AU)

Introduction.The Beers Criteria is the most widely used criteria to assess the use of potentially inappropriate medication in large populations, but they do not include some medications that are frequently used outside the United States. Objective.To make an adaptation of the Beers Criteria published in 2019 to the context of Argentina. Methods. A preliminary list of potentially inappropriate medication adapted to local market and practice was designed, which was then agreed upon by a panel of experts (Delphi method). Results. Of the 112 original drugs in the table 2 of the Beers Criteria (individually or as a group), 36 were excluded because they were not available in Argentina and 23 locally marketed drugs but not in the US were included. After two rounds and agreeing to add two additional pharmacological groups to this list (antimigraine and peripheral vasodilators), it was decided to add picosulfate, bisacodyl, sennosides and cascara sagrada as potentially inappropriate medication in the group of anti-constipation agents, fluoxetine among. the selective serotonin reup take inhibitors and Ginkgo biloba as an anti-dementia drug. There was also consensus in warning about the risk of orthostatic hypotension associated with tamsulosin,in advising consideration of the total anticholinergic load of the therapeutic regimen administered, and in recommending paracetamol as the first line of pain treatment, associated or not with opioids. Conclusions. Having a version of the Beers Criteria 2019 adapted to the Argentine context will contribute to the development and monitoring of interventions to prevent and reduce the consumption of potentially inappropriate medication. (AU)

Assessing the overall medication use by elderly people in a Brazilian hospital using the start/stopp criteria version 2

To estimate the frequency of the use of medicines listed in the Screening Tool to Alert Doctors to the Right Treatment (START) and Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria version 2 among the elderly. A cross-sectional study was conducted on elderly who were attended in medical clinic and cardiology sectors in a hospital in southern Brazil attended at a hospital from February through September 2016. A data-collection tool was used to obtain information on variables, such as demographic and clinical data, and medications used before and during the hospitalization period. The adequacy of the medicines taken was examined with regard to omission (START) or inappropriate use (STOPP). This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the University of Southern Santa Catarina. A total of 307 subjects were included in the final sample. The mean age was 75.2 years (SD = 8; range 65-102). Of the total, 93.5% had had at least one potential prescribing omission (PPO) listed in the START criteria, whereas 95.4% used at least one medicine of the STOPP criteria. PPO was significantly associated with lower mean age (74.9 years, SD = 7.9 versus 79.0 years, SD = 8.8) among the elderly who did not have PPOs detected by the START criteria (p-value=0.03). Furthermore, PPO was associated with longer hospital stay (18 versus 9 days; p-value=0.03). This study revealed inadequate prescription affecting 99.3% of the participating patients. To the best of our knowledge, this was the first to use the START and STOPP criteria, version 2, in Brazil.

Assessment tool for potentially inappropriate medication use in the elderly: a scoping review protocol

Potentially Inappropriate Medication for the elderly (PIM) are drugs in which the safety risks may exceed the benefits, especially when there are safer alternatives. The use of PIM is associated with increased hospitalizations and it is estimated that one every five prescriptions presents at least one PIM. In this context, there are several assessment tools for identification of PIM. The first assessment tool developed was Beers criteria and since its publication, new tools have been developed. The objective of this scoping review is to explore studies presenting assessment tools of PIM to map characteristics, justifications, and therapeutic equivalents. This review will consider studies that developed or validated an assessment tool of PIM. Electronic searches will be performed in PubMed and Scopus with no time limit. Two researchers, independently, will select registries and extract data of studies and tool characteristics, PIM and potentially inappropriate interaction, condition, justification, and therapeutic equivalents. The findings will be presented in narrative form including tables and figures to aid in data presentation, where appropriate.(AU)