STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons’ Prescriptions) and START (Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment). Consensus validation
ABSTRACT Older people experience more concurrent illnesses, are prescribed more medications and suffer more adverse drug events than younger people. Many drugs predispose older people to adverse events such as falls and cognitive impairment, thus increasing morbidity and health resource utilization. At the same time, older people are often denied potentially beneficial, clinically indicated medications without a valid reason. We aimed to validate a new screening tool of older persons' prescriptions incorporating criteria for potentially inappropriate drugs called STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions) and criteria for potentially appropriate, indicated drugs called START (Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right, i.e. appropriate, indicated Treatment).
A Delphi consensus technique was used to establish the content validity of STOPP/START. An 18-member expert panel from academic centers in Ireland and the United Kingdom completed two rounds of the Delphi process by mail survey. Inter-rater reliability was assessed by determining the kappa-statistic for measure of agreement on 100 data-sets.
STOPP is comprised of 65 clinically significant criteria for potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people. Each criterion is accompanied by a concise explanation as to why the prescribing practice is potentially inappropriate. START consists of 22 evidence-based prescribing indicators for commonly encountered diseases in older people. Inter-rater reliability is favorable with a kappa-coefficient of 0.75 for STOPP and 0.68 for START.
STOPP/START is a valid, reliable and comprehensive screening tool that enables the prescribing physician to appraise an older patient's prescription drugs in the context of his/her concurrent diagnoses.
- SourceAvailable from: François Angoulvant
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "The Delphi method is one of the main method used for the development of tools designed to detect inappropriate prescriptions in geriatric patients , , –. The number of experts to develop geriatric tools vary between 11 and 32 and their specialties include pharmacy, psychopharmacology, pharmacology, pharmacoepidemiology, internal medicine or geriatrics , , , , . For the validation of POPI, the number of experts in each category was equal so as to ensure that hospital and community environments were equally represented. "
ABSTRACT: Introduction Rational prescribing for children is an issue for all countries and has been inadequately studied. Inappropriate prescriptions, including drug omissions, are one of the main causes of medication errors in this population. Our aim is to develop a screening tool to identify omissions and inappropriate prescriptions in pediatrics based on French and international guidelines. Methods A selection of diseases was included in the tool using data from social security and hospital statistics. A literature review was done to obtain criteria which could be included in the tool called POPI. A 2-round-Delphi consensus technique was used to establish the content validity of POPI; panelists were asked to rate their level of agreement with each proposition on a 9-point Likert scale and add suggestions if necessary. Results 108 explicit criteria (80 inappropriate prescriptions and 28 omissions) were obtained and submitted to a 16-member expert panel (8 pharmacists, 8 pediatricians hospital-based −50%- or working in community −50%-). Criteria were categorized according to the main physiological systems (gastroenterology, respiratory infections, pain, neurology, dermatology and miscellaneous). Each criterion was accompanied by a concise explanation as to why the practice is potentially inappropriate in pediatrics (including references). Two round of Delphi process were completed via an online questionnaire. 104 out of the 108 criteria submitted to experts were selected after 2 Delphi rounds (79 inappropriate prescriptions and 25 omissions). Discussion Conclusion POPI is the first screening-tool develop to detect inappropriate prescriptions and omissions in pediatrics based on explicit criteria. Inter-user reliability study is necessary before using the tool, and prospective study to assess the effectiveness of POPI is also necessary.PLoS ONE 06/2014; 9(6):e101171. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0101171 · 3.23 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "On the contrary, long-acting benzodiazepines were not significantly associated with time to first fall or number of falls.24 However, long-acting benzodiazepines (but not short-acting benzodiazepines) have been described as potentially inappropriate in Screening Tool of Older Persons’ Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria.25 Therefore, there might be the need to regularly revise and update these criteria. "
ABSTRACT: Background Falls among the elderly are an issue internationally and a public health problem that brings substantial economic and quality-of-life burdens to individuals and society. Falls prevention is an important measure of nursing quality and patient safety. Numerous studies have evaluated the association of medication use with fall risk in elderly patients. However, an up-to-date review has not been available to summarize the multifaceted pharmaceutical concerns in the prevention of medication-related falls. Materials and methods Relevant literature was identified by performing searches in PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, covering the period until February 2014. We included studies that described an association between medications and falls, and effects of drug pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties, characteristics of medication use, and pharmacological interventions on fall risk in elderly patients. The full text of each included article was critically reviewed, and data interpretation was performed. Results Fall-risk-increasing drugs (FRIDs) include central nervous system-acting agents, cough preparations, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, anti-Alzheimer’s agents, antiplatelet agents, calcium antagonists, diuretics, α-blockers, digoxin, hypoglycemic drugs, neurotoxic chemotherapeutic agents, nasal preparations, and antiglaucoma ophthalmic preparations. The degree of medication-related fall risk was dependent on one or some of the following factors: drug pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties (eg, elimination half-life, metabolic pathway, genetic polymorphism, risk rating of medications despite belonging to the same therapeutic class) and/or characteristics of medication use (eg, number of medications and drug–drug interactions, dose strength, duration of medication use and time since stopping, medication change, prescribing appropriateness, and medication adherence). Pharmacological interventions, including withdrawal of FRIDs, pharmacist-conducted clinical medication review, and computerized drug alerts, were effective in reducing fall risk. Conclusion Based on the literature review, clear practical recommendations for clinicians to prevent falls in the elderly included making a list of FRIDs, establishing a computerized alert system for when to e-prescribe FRIDs, seeking an alternative drug with lower fall risk, withdrawing FRIDs if clinically indicated, taking pertinent cautions when the use of FRIDs cannot be avoidable, paying attention to prescribing appropriateness, simplifying the medication regimen, strengthening pharmacist-conducted clinical medication review, ensuring the label of each FRID dispensed contains a corresponding warning sign, being careful when medication change occurs, enhancing medication adherence, and mandating for periodic reassessment of potential risk associated with the patient’s medication regimen. Further studies should be conducted in this area, such as investigating whether medication reconciliation and improving medication adherence could decrease the rate of falls.Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 06/2014; 10(1):437-48. DOI:10.2147/TCRM.S63756 · 1.47 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "The United States (US) Beers criteria, the most commonly used explicit process measure for assessing potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in older people, has been widely validated [6,7], but has some limitations; for example, approximately 50% of the Beers drugs are unavailable in European countries . The recently developed ‘Screening Tool of Older Persons potentially inappropriate Prescriptions’ (STOPP) provides a more comprehensive explicit process measure of PIP, is validated for use in European countries , and overcomes some of the limitations inherent in the Beers criteria. "
ABSTRACT: Background: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in older people is associated with increases in morbidity, hospitalisation and mortality. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of and factors associated with PIP, among those aged ≥70 years, in the United Kingdom, using a comprehensive set of prescribing indicators and comparing these to estimates obtained from a truncated set of the same indicators. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was carried out in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), in 2007. Participants included those aged ≥ 70 years, in CPRD. Fifty-two PIP indicators from the Screening Tool of Older Persons Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria were applied to data on prescribed drugs and clinical diagnoses. Overall prevalence of PIP and prevalence according to individual STOPP criteria were estimated. The relationship between PIP and polypharmacy (≥4 medications), comorbidity, age, and gender was examined. A truncated, subset of 28 STOPP criteria that were used in two previous studies, were further applied to the data to facilitate comparison. Results: Using 52 indicators, the overall prevalence of PIP in the study population (n = 1,019,491) was 29%. The most common examples of PIP were therapeutic duplication (11.9%), followed by use of aspirin with no indication (11.3%) and inappropriate use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) (3.7%). PIP was strongly associated with polypharmacy (Odds Ratio 18.2, 95% Confidence Intervals, 18.0-18.4, P < 0.05). PIP was more common in those aged 70-74 years vs. 85 years or more and in males. Application of the smaller subset of the STOPP criteria resulted in a lower PIP prevalence at 14.9% (95% CIs 14.8-14.9%) (n = 151,598). The most common PIP issues identified with this subset were use of PPIs at maximum dose for > 8 weeks, NSAIDs for > 3 months, and use of long-term neuroleptics. Conclusions: PIP was prevalent in the UK and increased with polypharmacy. Application of the comprehensive set of STOPP criteria allowed more accurate estimation of PIP compared to the subset of criteria used in previous studies. These findings may provide a focus for targeted interventions to reduce PIP.BMC Geriatrics 06/2014; 14(1):72. DOI:10.1186/1471-2318-14-72 · 1.68 Impact Factor