Deprescribing antihypertensive drugs in frail older adults.

Antihypertensive drugs are commonly used by older adults because of the high prevalence of cardiovascular disease and its risk factors, and the increased absolute benefit of blood pressure reduction with increasing age. Clinical trials of blood pressure reduction in older adults have generally excluded older adults with multimorbidity, frailty and limited life expectancy. In this population, the benefit-harm ratio of aggressive blood pressure lowering may become unfavourable; a more relaxed blood pressure target may be appropriate; and deprescribing (cessation or dose reduction) of one or more antihypertensive drugs can be considered. Before deprescribing an antihypertensive drug, it is important to consider other indications for which it may have been prescribed (e.g. heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, diabetic nephropathy, atrial fibrillation). Evidence from randomised controlled deprescribing trials indicates that it is possible to deprescribe antihypertensives in frail older people. However, some patients may experience an increase in blood pressure that warrants restarting the drug. There are limited data on long-term outcomes (follow-up in deprescribing trials ranged from 4 to 56 weeks). The risk of adverse outcomes associated with deprescribing, such as withdrawal effects, can be minimised through appropriate planning, patient engagement, dose tapering and monitoring.

Effects of the discontinuation of antihypertensive treatment on neuropsychiatric symptoms and quality of life in nursing home residents with dementia (DANTON): a multicentre, open-label, blinded-outcome, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Based on observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs), the benefit-harm balance of antihypertensive treatment in older adults with dementia is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether discontinuing antihypertensive treatment reduces neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPSs) and maintains quality of life (QoL) in nursing home residents with dementia. DESIGN: Open-label, blinded-outcome RCT. Randomisation 1:1, stratified by nursing home organisation and baseline NPS. Trial registration: NL7365. SUBJECTS: Dutch long-term care residents with moderate-to-severe dementia and systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≤160 mmHg during antihypertensive treatment. Exclusion criteria included heart failure NYHA-class-III/IV, recent cardiovascular events/procedures or life expectancy <4 months (planned sample size n = 492). MEASUREMENTS: Co-primary outcomes NPS (Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home [NPI-NH]) and QoL (Qualidem) at 16 weeks. RESULTS: From 9 November 2018 to 4 May 2021, 205 participants (median age 85.8 [IQR 79.6-89.5] years; 79.5% female; median SBP 134 [IQR 123-146] mmHg) were randomised to either antihypertensive treatment discontinuation (n = 101) or usual care (n = 104). Safety concerns, combined with lacking benefits, prompted the data safety and monitoring board to advice a premature cessation of randomisation. At 16-week follow-up, no significant differences were found between groups for NPI-NH (adjusted mean difference 1.6 [95% CI -2.3 to 5.6]; P = 0.42) or Qualidem (adjusted mean difference - 2.5 [95% CI -6.0 to 1.0]; P = 0.15). Serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred in 36% (discontinuation) and 24% (usual care) of the participants (adjusted hazard ratio 1.65 [95% CI 0.98-2.79]). All 32-week outcomes favoured usual care. CONCLUSION: Halfway through this study, a non-significant increased SAE risk associated with discontinuing antihypertensive treatment was observed, and an associated interim analysis showed that significant worthwhile health gain for discontinuation of antihypertensive treatment was unlikely. This unbeneficial benefit-harm balance shows that discontinuation of antihypertensive treatment in this context does not appear to be either safe or beneficial enough to be recommended in older adults with dementia.

Treatment with Antithrombotics in the Last Year of Life-Incidence of Bleeding and Side Effects After Deprescribing.

Background: Patients in palliative care are often treated with antithrombotics, even in the late stages of disease. Clear guidelines regarding deprescribing are lacking. Objective: The aims of this study were to investigate bleeding as a side effect of antithrombotic treatments the last year in life and map the timing of deprescribing. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed. All medical records were screened for deceased patients admitted to a palliative care unit in Stockholm, Sweden, over a 3-year period. Patients with antithrombotics were identified; data on bleeding, and on side effects due to deprescribing, were extracted from the medical records. Log-binomial models were used to explore factors associated with bleeding. Results: Of 1501 patients, 897 were treated with antithrombotics during the last year of life (mean age 75 years, 41% women). Of these, 56% continued treatment up until the last 3 days of life. Of the 897 patients, 144 (16%) had at least one bleeding during the treatment. The risk for bleeding was significantly higher for men with prostate cancer compared to other cancer forms, adjusted relative risk 1.9 (95% CI 1.1-3.2). No difference in risk for bleeding was found between sex, age groups, type of antithrombotics, or indication. Two patients (0.2%) developed strokes after antithrombotics were deprescribed. Conclusions: Treatment with antithrombotics during the last year of life is associated with a high risk of bleeding. In this cohort, men with prostate cancer seemed to have more side effects of bleeding than other groups. Few experienced side effects from deprescribing.

Complex Patterns of Antihypertensive Treatment Changes in Long-Term Care Residents.

OBJECTIVES: Antihypertensive treatment changes are common in long-term care residents, yet data on the frequency and predictors of changes are lacking. We described the patterns of antihypertensive changes and examined the triggering factors. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 24,870 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) nursing home residents aged ≥65 years with long-term stays (≥180 days) from 2006 to 2019. METHODS: We obtained data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse. Based on Bar Code Medication Administration medication data, we defined 2 types of change events in 180 days of admission: deprescribing (reduced number of antihypertensives or dose reduction of ≥30% compared with the previous week and maintained for at least 2 weeks) and intensification (opposite of deprescribing). Mortality was identified within 2 years after admission. RESULTS: More than 85% of residents were prescribed antihypertensives and 68% of them experienced ≥1 change event during the first 6 months of the nursing home stay. We categorized residents into 10 distinct patterns: no change (27%), 1 deprescribing (11%), multiple deprescribing (5%), 1 intensification (10%), multiple intensification (7%), 1 deprescribing followed by 1 intensification (3%), 1 intensification followed by 1 deprescribing (4%), 3 changes with mixed events (7%), >3 changes with mixed events (10%), and no antihypertensive use (15%). Treatment changes were more frequent in residents with better physical function and/or cognitive function. Potentially triggering factors differed by the type of antihypertensive change: incident high blood pressure and cardiovascular events were associated with intensification, and low blood pressure, weight loss, and falls were associated with deprescribing. Death occurred in 7881 (32%) residents over 2 years. The highest mortality was for those without antihypertensive medication (incidence = 344/1000 person-years). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Patterns of medication changes existing in long-term care residents are complex. Future studies should explore the benefits and harms of these antihypertensive treatment changes.

Multidisciplinary Consensus for Rationalizing the Use of Acid Suppressants in Children and Adults: CONFOR.

The use of acid suppression therapy (AST) is a common approach for managing a wide spectrum of acid peptic disorders. Histamine type 2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the most widely prescribed AST in routine clinical practice. However, an exponential surge in the prescriptions of PPIs, such as Omeprazole, Esomeprazole, Pantoprazole, Lansoprazole in recent years and their associated adverse effects have raised concern about their inappropriate and overuse, both in children and adults. To address these issues, a three-step modified Delphi polling process was employed to establish best practice consensus statements for rationalizing the use of acid suppressants. A multidisciplinary expert panel of 13 health professionals across medical specialties, including gastroenterologists, hepatologists, pediatric gastroenterologists, pediatricians, otolaryngologists, cardiologists, nephrologists, gynecologist and orthopedists actively contributed to this collaborative process of consensus development. The expert panel proposed 21 consensus statements providing best practice points on the general use and safety of acid suppressants based on a comprehensive review of scientific literature and clinical expertise. The panel also collaboratively developed a PPI deprescribing algorithm. Altogether, this consensus paper offers evidence-based recommendations and guidance for the rational use of acid suppressants with a blueprint for deprescribing PPIs. This consensus paper contributes to aiding primary care practitioners in improving patient outcomes and minimizing healthcare costs. Additionally, it enhances patient safety and curtail inappropriate usage. How to cite this article: Prabhoo RY, Pai UA, Wadhwa A, et al. Multidisciplinary Consensus for Rationalizing the Use of Acid Suppressants in Children and Adults: CONFOR. Euroasian J Hepato-Gastroenterol 2024;14(1):99-119.

Pharmacist-Led Deprescribing Using STOPPFrail for Frail Older Adults in Nursing Homes.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of pharmacist-guided deprescribing using the STOPPFrail (Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions in Frail adults with a limited life expectancy) criteria in frail older nursing home residents. DESIGN: Prospective, unblinded, non-randomized, intervention study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged ≥65 years with advanced frailty resident in 6 independent nursing homes in Ireland. METHODS: STOPPFrail-based deprescribing recommendations were developed by a pharmacist and presented to residents' general practitioners (GPs), who decided to implement or not. Measured outcomes included number of prescribed medications, medication costs, anticholinergic cognitive burden (ACB), drug burden index (DBI), modified medication appropriateness index (MMAI), quality of life (QoL), non-elective hospitalizations, emergency department visits, falls, and mortality were measured at baseline, post review, and at 6 months post review. RESULTS: Ninety-nine residents were recruited. Most (94%) were prescribed ≥1 potentially inappropriate medication (PIM). The most frequent PIMs were medications without a clearly documented indication (29.6%) and vitamin D (16.9%). Of 348 recommendations provided to GPs, 203 (58%) were accepted and 193 (55%) were implemented. Relating to baseline, post review, and at 6 months: the mean ± standard deviation (SD) number of medications was 16.0 ± 6.1, 14.6 ± 5.7 (P < .001), and 15.4 ± 5.5 (P < .001). The monthly mean ± SD medication cost per patient was €186.8 ± 123.7, €172.7 ± 119.0 (P < .001), and €186.4 ± 121.2 (P = .95). There were significant post-review decreases in the mean DBI, ACB, and MMAI of 9.7%, 9.6%, and 3.7%, respectively (P < .001), which remained significant at 6 months (P < .001). There were no significant differences in falls, emergency department visits, non-elective hospitalizations, or QoL. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: STOPPFrail-guided deprescribing led by a pharmacist in nursing homes appeared to significantly reduce PIMs, medication costs (initially), and anticholinergic and sedative burdens, without adversely affecting other patient outcomes. Greater consideration should therefore be given to the wider integration of pharmacists into nursing homes to optimize the medications and health outcomes of frail older adults.

Cardiovascular risk associated with changes in anticholinergic load on four different scales: a registry-based cohort study of geriatric outpatients.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have shown that anticholinergic medications are associated with cardiovascular disease. Little is known about how discontinuation of anticholinergic medication affects this association. We investigated how baseline anticholinergic load and change in anticholinergic load associates with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) on four different scales. METHODS: We included all geriatric outpatients aged 65 and older in Denmark between January 2011 and December 2018. Data were sourced from Danish national registries. Anticholinergic drug exposure was assessed at first contact to the outpatient clinic (baseline) and changes were assessed at 180 days after outpatient contact. Anticholinergic scales were the CRIDECO Anticholinergic Load Scale, Anticholinergic Drugs Scale, Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden and a scale by the Danish Institute of Rational Pharmacotherapy. Multivariate analyses were conducted to investigate the 1- and 5-year risk of MACE by baseline anticholinergic load and changes in anticholinergic load after 180 days. RESULTS: We included a total of 64 378 patients in the analysis of baseline anticholinergic load and 54 010 patients remained after 180 days for inclusion in the analysis of change in anticholinergic load. At baseline the mean age was 81.7 year (SD 7.5) and 68% were women. Higher level of anticholinergic load on any scale associated with greater risk of MACE in a dose response pattern. There were no association between reduction in anticholinergic load and risk of MACE. CONCLUSION: While anticholinergic load at baseline was associated with MACE, reducing anticholinergic load did not lower the risk of MACE indicating the association may not be causal.

A quantitative study on the impact of a community falls pharmacist role, on medicines optimisation in older people at risk of falls.

BACKGROUND: The World Falls guidance includes medication review as part of its recommended multifactorial risk assessment for those at high risk of falling. Use of Falls Risk Increasing Drugs (FRIDs) along with polypharmacy and anticholinergic burden (ACB) are known to increase the risk of falls in older people. METHOD: The impact of a community falls pharmacist within a hospital Trust, working as part of a multi-professional community falls prevention service, was evaluated in 92 people aged 65 years or older, by analysing data before and after pharmacist review, namely: number and type of FRIDs prescribed; anticholinergic burden score using ACBcalc®; appropriateness of medicines prescribed; bone health review using an approved too; significance of clinical intervention; cost avoidance, drug cost savings and environmental impact. RESULTS: Following pharmacist review, there was a reduction in polypharmacy (mean number of medicines prescribed per patient reduced by 8%; p < 0.05) and anticholinergic burden score (average score per patient reduced by 33%; p < 0.05). Medicines appropriateness improved (Medicines Appropriateness Index score decreased by 56%; p < 0.05). There were 317 clinically significant interventions by the community falls pharmacist. One hundred and one FRIDs were deprescribed. Annual cost avoidance and drug cost savings were £40,689-£82,642 and avoidable carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from reducing inappropriate prescribing amounted to 941 kg CO2. CONCLUSION: The community falls pharmacist role increases prescribing appropriateness in the older population at risk of falls, and is an effective and cost-efficient means to optimise medicines in this population, as well as having a positive impact on the environment.

Cross-sectional study to evaluate patients' medication management with a new model of care: incorporating a pharmacist into a community specialist palliative care telehealth service.

BACKGROUND: Patients receiving palliative care are often on complex medication regimes to manage their symptoms and comorbidities and at high risk of medication-related problems. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to evaluate the involvement of a pharmacist to an existing community specialist palliative care telehealth service on patients' medication management. METHOD: The specialist palliative care pharmacist attended two palliative care telehealth sessions per week over a six-month period (October 2020 to March 2021). Attendance was allocated based on funding received. Data collected from the medication management reviews included prevalence of polypharmacy, number of inappropriate medication according to the Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in Frail adults with limited life expectancy criteria (STOPP/FRAIL) and recommendations on deprescribing, symptom control and medication management. RESULTS: In total 95 patients participated in the pharmaceutical telehealth service with a mean age of 75.2 years (SD 10.67). Whilst 81 (85.3%) patients had a cancer diagnosis, 14 (14.7%) had a non-cancer diagnosis. At referral, 84 (88.4%, SD 4.57) patients were taking ≥ 5 medications with 51 (53.7%, SD 5.03) taking ≥ 10 medications. According to STOPP/FRAIL criteria, 142 potentially inappropriate medications were taken by 54 (56.8%) patients, with a mean of 2.6 (SD 1.16) inappropriate medications per person. Overall, 142 recommendations were accepted from the pharmaceutical medication management review including 49 (34.5%) related to deprescribing, 20 (14.0%) to medication-related problems, 35 (24.7%) to symptom management and 38 (26.8%) to medication administration. CONCLUSION: This study provided evidence regarding the value of including a pharmacist in palliative care telehealth services. Input from the pharmacist resulted in improved symptom management of community palliative care patients and their overall medication management.

Enhancing Medication Safety through Implementing the Qatar Tool for Reducing Inappropriate Medication (QTRIM) in Ambulatory Older Adults.

INTRODUCTION: To promote optimal healthcare delivery, safeguarding older adults from the risks associated with inappropriate medication use is paramount. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of implementing the Qatar Tool for Reducing Inappropriate Medication (QTRIM) in ambulatory older adults to enhance medication safety. METHOD: The QTRIM was developed by an expert consensus panel using the Beers Criteria and contained a list of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) based on the local formulary. Using quality improvement methodology, it was piloted and implemented in two outpatient pharmacy settings serving geriatric medicine and dermatology clinics at Rumailah Hospital, Qatar. Key performance indicators (KPIs) using implementation documentation as a process measure and the percentage reduction in PIM prescriptions as an outcome measure were assessed before and after QTRIM implementation. This study was conducted between July 2022 and September 2023. RESULTS: In the outpatient department (OPD) geriatric pharmacy, the prescription rate of PIMs was reduced from an average of 1.2 ± 0.7 PIMs per 1000 orders in 2022 to an average of 0.8 ± 0.2 PIMs per 1000 orders in 2023. In the OPD geriatric pharmacy, the results showed a 66.6% reduction in tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) (from 30 to 10), a reduction in first-generation antihistamines by 51.7% (29 to 14), and muscle relaxants by 33.3% (36 to 24). While in dermatology, the older adult prescription rate of PIMs was reduced from an average of 8 ± 3 PIMs per 1000 orders in 2022 to a rate of 5 ± 3 PIMs per 1000 orders in 2023; the most PIM reductions were (49.4%) in antihistamines (from 89 to 45), while muscle relaxants and TCAs showed a minimal reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing QTRIM with pharmacy documentation monitoring markedly reduced the PIMs dispensed from two specialized outpatient pharmacies serving older adults. It may be a promising effective strategy to enhance medication safety in outpatient pharmacy settings.

Assessing the Efficacy of the ARMOR Tool-Based Deprescribing Intervention for Fall Risk Reduction in Older Patients Taking Fall Risk-Increasing Drugs (DeFRID Trial): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Falls in older patients can lead to serious health complications and increased health care costs. Fall risk-increasing drugs (FRIDs) are a group of drugs that may induce falls or increase the tendency to fall (ie, fall risk). Deprescribing is the process of withdrawal from an inappropriate medication, supervised by a health care professional, with the goal of managing polypharmacy and improving outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the effectiveness of a deprescribing intervention based on the Assess, Review, Minimize, Optimize, and Reassess (ARMOR) tool in reducing the risk of falls in older patients and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of deprescribing FRIDs. METHODS: This is an open-label, parallel-group randomized controlled academic trial. Individuals aged 60-80 years who are currently taking 5 or more prescribed drugs, including at least 1 FRID, will be recruited. Demographic data, medical conditions, medication lists, orthostatic hypotension, and fall history details will be collected. Fall concern will be assessed using the Fall Efficacy Scale, and fall risk will be assessed by the Timed Up and Go test and Tinetti Performance-Oriented Mobility Assessment tool. In this study, all treating physicians will be randomized using a stratified randomization method based on seniority. Randomized physicians will do deprescribing with the ARMOR tool for patients on FRIDs. Participants will maintain diaries, and monthly phone follow-ups will be undertaken to monitor falls and adverse events. Physical assessments will be performed to evaluate fall risk every 3 months for a year. The rationality of prescription drugs will be evaluated using the World Health Organization's core indicators. RESULTS: The study received a grant from the Indian Council of Medical Research-Safe and Rational Use of Medicine in October 2023. The study is scheduled to commence in April 2024 and conclude by 2026. Efficacy will be measured by fall frequency and changes in fall risk scores. Cost-effectiveness analysis will also include the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio calculation. Adverse events related to deprescription will be recorded. CONCLUSIONS: This trial will provide essential insights into the efficacy of the ARMOR tool in reducing falls among the geriatric population who are taking FRIDs. Additionally, it will provide valuable information on the cost-effectiveness of deprescribing practices, offering significant implications for improving the well-being of older patients and optimizing health care resource allocation. The findings from this study will be pertinent for health care professionals, policy makers, and researchers focused on geriatric care and fall prevention strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Registry - India CTRI/2023/12/060516; https://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/pubview2.php. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/55638.

Exit Strategy: Balancing the Risks and Rewards of Antiseizure Medication Withdrawal.

The majority of people with epilepsy achieves long-term seizure-freedom and may consider withdrawal of their anti-seizure medications (ASMs). Withdrawal of ASMs can yield substantial benefits but may be associated with potential risks. This review critically examines the existing literature on ASM withdrawal, emphasizing evidence-based recommendations, where available. Our focus encompasses deprescribing strategies for individuals who have attained seizure freedom through medical treatment, those who have undergone successful epilepsy surgery, and individuals initiated on ASMs following acute symptomatic seizures. We explore state-of-the-art prognostic models in these scenarios that could guide the decision-making process. The review underscores the importance of a collaborative shared-decision approach between patients, caregivers, and physicians. We describe the subjective and objective factors influencing these decisions and illustrate how trade-offs may be effectively managed in practice.

How could proton pump inhibitors de-prescription be managed in geriatric long-term care?

BACKGROUND: Evaluate the misuse of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in geriatric long-term care (LTC) patients and improve caregiving by de-prescribing non-relevant PPIs in this population. AIM: This study was conducted in the long-term care department of the geriatric hospital Pierre-Garraud in Lyon. All patients receiving PPI for more than 8 weeks were included. A reassessment form was filled to evaluate the treatment benefit/risk ratio during a collegial consultation between the patient's referring physicians and pharmacists. During these consultations, the following possible decisions were taken: continuation, dose adjustment or gradual discontinuation of treatment. Patients' monitoring were performed one month and three months after discontinuation to detect any relapses and causes. RESULTS: Among the 113 patients included, 97 patients had their treatment re-evaluated by collegial consultation. Forty-four (45.4%) patients were treated in accordance with recommendations. For 24 of them, the indication was symptomatic recurrent gastroesophageal reflux disease. The treatment of more than half of the re-evaluated patients (54.6%) was gradually stopped. After the 3-month follow-up post-discontinuation, excluding patients who died during this period, 80.9% of the discontinuations were well-tolerated and only nine were resumed (19.1%). CONCLUSION: This study allowed a re-evaluation of PPI treatments in a high-risk population and offered a decision support tool focused on the benefit/risk balance of PPIs; 55% of treatments were considered irrelevant and could be stopped with 80% of good tolerance.

Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescribing of benzodiazepines in older nursing home residents.

INTRODUCTION: Previous research has raised concerns about high prevalence of drug-related problems, polypharmacy and inappropriate benzodiazepine prescribing in nursing homes (NHs) and confirmed lack of studies from Central and South-Eastern Europe. The aim of our study was to determine the prevalence and characteristics of polypharmacy, hyperpolypharmacy and inappropriate benzodiazepine prescribing in NH residents in Croatia. METHODS: Data from 226 older NH residents from five Croatian NHs were collected using the InterRAI Long-Term Care Facilities assessment form. The prevalence and determinants of polypharmacy/hyperpolypharmacy and patterns of inappropriate benzodiazepine prescribing were documented. RESULTS: The prevalence of polypharmacy (49.6%) and hyperpolypharmacy (25.7%) among NH residents was high. In our study, 72.1% of NH residents were prescribed at least one psychotropic agent, 36.7% used 2-3 psychotropics and 6.6% used 4+ psychotropics. Among benzodiazepine users (55.8%), 28% of residents were prescribed benzodiazepines in higher than recommended geriatric doses, 75% used them for the long term and 48% were prescribed concomitant interacting medications. The odds of being prescribed polypharmacy/hyperpolypharmacy were significantly higher for older patients with polymorbidity (6+ disorders, proportional odds ratio (POR) = 19.8), type II diabetes (POR = 5.2), ischemic heart disease (POR = 4.6), higher frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS ≥5); POR = 4.3) and gastrointestinal problems (POR = 4.8). CONCLUSIONS: Our research underscores the persistent challenge of inappropriate medication use and drug-related harms among older NH residents, despite existing evidence and professional campaigns. Effective regulatory and policy interventions, including the implementation of geriatrician and clinical pharmacy services, are essential to address this critical issue and ensure optimal medication management for vulnerable NH populations.

Effects of a multicomponent communication training to involve older people in decisions to DEPRESCRIBE cardiometabolic medication in primary care (CO-DEPRESCRIBE): protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial with embedded process and economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Deprescribing of medication for cardiovascular risk factors and diabetes has been incorporated in clinical guidelines but proves to be difficult to implement in primary care. Training of healthcare providers is needed to enhance deprescribing in eligible patients. This study will examine the effects of a blended training program aimed at initiating and conducting constructive deprescribing consultations with patients. METHODS: A cluster-randomized trial will be conducted in which local pharmacy-general practice teams in the Netherlands will be randomized to conducting clinical medication reviews with patients as usual (control) or after receiving the CO-DEPRESCRIBE training program (intervention). People of 75 years and older using specific cardiometabolic medication (diabetes drugs, antihypertensives, statins) and eligible for a medication review will be included. The CO-DEPRESCRIBE intervention is based on previous work and applies models for patient-centered communication and shared decision making. It consists of 5 training modules with supportive tools. The primary outcome is the percentage of patients with at least 1 cardiometabolic medication deintensified. Secondary outcomes include patient involvement in decision making, healthcare provider communication skills, health/medication-related outcomes, attitudes towards deprescribing, medication regimen complexity and health-related quality of life. Additional safety and cost parameters will be collected. It is estimated that 167 patients per study arm are needed in the final intention-to-treat analysis using a mixed effects model. Taking loss to follow-up into account, 40 teams are asked to recruit 10 patients each. A baseline and 6-months follow-up assessment, a process evaluation, and a cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted. DISCUSSION: The hypothesis is that the training program will lead to more proactive and patient-centered deprescribing of cardiometabolic medication. By a comprehensive evaluation, an increase in knowledge needed for sustainable implementation of deprescribing in primary care is expected. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT05507177).

Deprescribing in older adults in a French community: a questionnaire study on patients' beliefs and attitudes.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) have a central role to play on reduction of polypharmacy and deprescribing. This study aimed to assess beliefs and attitudes towards deprescribing in patients, aged 65 years or older in primary care, and to identify factors associated with deprescribing and their willingness to stop medication. METHODS: A questionnaire study was performed between 23 May and 29 July 2022 on patients aged 65 years or older attending a GP's surgery in a French area. We used the French version of the revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing self-report questionnaire (rPATD), which measures four subscales ("Burden", "Appropriateness", "Concerns about stopping" and, "Involvement"), patients' willingness to stop one of their regular medicines, and patients' satisfaction with their current medicines. RESULTS: The study enrolled 200 patients. Median age was 76 years old (IQR 71-81), 55% were women, and 42.5% took 5 or more medications per day. Although most patients (92.5%) were satisfied with their current medicines, 35% were reluctant to stop medications they had been taking for a long time, and 89.5% were willing to stop medication if asked to by their GP. Patients aged less than 75 years old reported more concerns about stopping. Women and patients with higher educational attainment showed significantly higher involvement in medication management. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of older adults were willing to stop one or more of their regular medicines if asked to do so by their GP. GPs should address deprescribing into their current practice.

Clinical impact of medication review and deprescribing in older inpatients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is a primary risk factor for the prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), drug-drug interactions (DDIs), and ultimately, adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Medication review and deprescribing represent effective strategies to simplify therapeutic regimens, minimize risks, and reduce PIM prescriptions. This systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental and observational studies aimed to evaluate the impact of different medication review and deprescribing interventions in hospitalized older patients. METHODS: Experimental and observational prospective cohort studies evaluating the clinical effects of medication review and deprescribing strategies in older hospitalized patients were searched in the bibliographic databases, PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, from inception until January 8, 2024. A narrative synthesis of the results was provided, along with a meta-analysis of dichotomous data (i.e., re-hospitalizations and mortality). RESULTS: Overall, 21 randomized controlled trials, 7 non-randomized interventional studies, and 2 prospective cohort studies were included in the systematic review. Of these, 14 (46.7%) assessed medication appropriateness as the primary outcome, while the remaining evaluated clinical outcomes (e.g., length of hospital stay, hospital readmissions, emergency department visits, and incidence of ADRs) and/or quality of life. The meta-analysis revealed a slight but statistically significant 8% reduction in hospital readmissions (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.85-0.99) following medication review and deprescribing, but no significant impact on mortality (HR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.96-1.00). Of the 30 included studies, 21 were considered at high risk of bias, mostly due to potential deviations from intended interventions and randomization processes. The remaining nine studies had "some concerns" (eight studies) or were considered at "low" risk of bias (one study). CONCLUSION: Medication review and deprescribing are associated with potential benefits in reducing hospital readmission rates among hospitalized older patients, particularly through the reduction of PIM prescriptions. The integration of thorough medication review and deprescribing protocols in hospital settings may improve post-discharge outcomes and reduce overall healthcare costs.

Factors influencing deprescribing in primary care for those towards the end of life: A qualitative interview study with patients and healthcare practitioners.

BACKGROUND: For people with limited lifetime expectancy, the benefit of many medications may be outweighed by their potential harms. Despite the relevance of reducing unnecessary medication use, deprescribing is poorly enacted in primary care practice. AIM: This study aims to describe factors, as identified by primary care professionals and patients, that influence deprescribing in the last phase of life. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews were conducted and analysed using a thematic approach. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: This study was performed in primary care settings, including general practices, hospices and community care teams in The Netherlands. Purposefully identified primary care professionals (general practitioners, pharmacists, nurses) and patients with limited lifetime expectancy due to advanced chronic illness or cancer and their caretakers were interviewed. RESULTS: Three themes emerged detailing factors influencing deprescribing in the last phase of life in primary care: (1) non-maleficence, the wish to avoid additional psychological or physical distress; (2) reactive care, the lack of priority and awareness of eligible patients; and (3) discontinuity of care within primary care and between primary care and specialty care. CONCLUSIONS: Deprescribing is an incremental process, complicated by the unpredictability of life expectancy and attitudes of patients and health care professionals that associate continued medication use with clinical stability. Opportunities to facilitate the deprescribing process and its acceptance include the routinely systematic identification of patients with limited life expectancy and potentially inappropriate medications, and normalisation of deprescribing as component of regular primary care, occurring for all patients and continuing into end-of-life care.