Article

Prescribing in elderly people 1 - Appropriate prescribing in elderly people: how well can it be measured and optimised?

Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States
The Lancet (Impact Factor: 39.21). 08/2007; 370(9582):173-84. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61091-5
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Prescription of medicines is a fundamental component of the care of elderly people, and optimisation of drug prescribing for this group of patients has become an important public-health issue worldwide. Several characteristics of ageing and geriatric medicine affect medication prescribing for elderly people and render the selection of appropriate pharmacotherapy a challenging and complex process. In the first paper in this series we aim to define and categorise appropriate prescribing in elderly people, critically review the instruments that are available to measure it and discuss their predictive validity, critically review recent randomised controlled intervention studies that assessed the effect of optimisation strategies on the appropriateness of prescribing in elderly people, and suggest directions for future research and practice.

3 Followers
 · 
311 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aimsto investigate the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication use among older people in Sweden according to five different published sets of explicit criteria from Europe and the US.Methods Nationwide cross-sectional, register-based study in the entire Sweden in 2008. All individuals aged 65 years and older were included (n = 1,346,709; both community-dwelling and institutionalized persons). We applied all drug-specific criteria included in the 2012 Beers Criteria, the Laroche's list, the PRISCUS list, the NORGEP criteria and the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare criteria. Main outcome was the potentially inappropriate drug use according to each set of criteria, separately and combined. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify individual factors associated with the use of potentially inappropriate drugs.ResultsThe prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication use varied between the explicit criteria from 16% (NORGEP criteria) to 24% (2012 Beers criteria). Overall, 38% of the older people were exposed to potentially inappropriate drug use by at least one of the five sets of criteria. While controlling for other possible covariates, female gender, institutionalisation and polypharmacy were systematically associated with inappropriate drug use, regardless of the set of explicit criteria we considered.Conclusion Although explicit criteria for inappropriate drug use among older people have been reported to be quite different in their content, they provide similar measures of the prevalence of potentially inappropriate drug use at the population level.
    British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 02/2015; DOI:10.1111/bcp.12615 · 3.69 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background There have been no multicenter studies that estimated the relations of either nurse or pharmacist home visit program to drug costs of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). This study aimed to establish whether patients who used nurse or pharmacist home visit programs (nurse or pharmacist program) had lower drug costs of PIMs than those who did not use nurse or pharmacist programs for older patients living at home. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted in home care settings in Japan, involving 430 patients aged 65 or older, of whom 276 were female. All received regular home visits from five clinics between May and December 2013. After the PIMs were identified with the Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria, we estimated the drug costs based on actual pharmaceutical prices and measured against who using nurse or pharmacist programs after a propensity score weighted adjustment. Results Patients who used nurse programs had lower drug cost of PIMs than those who did not use, but it was not significantly different (5.9 ± 13.1 vs 7.1 ± 13.9 USD per month, P = 0.199). The cost of PIMs for patients who used pharmacist programs also had no difference. (7.2 ± 14.5 vs 5.5 ± 11.5 USD per month, P = 0.06). In the patient groups who used nurse programs, patients who also used pharmacist programs had significantly higher costs of PIMs than those who used only nurse programs (5.5 ± 13.9 vs 2.5 ± 6.0 USD per month, P = 0.006). In patients group who did not use pharmacist programs, patients who only used nurse programs had significantly lower costs of PIMs than those who did not use nurse programs (3.6 ± 7.7 vs 5.8 ± 12.7 USD per month, P = 0.022). Conclusions Patients who used nurse program have a trend towards lower drug costs of PIMs than those who used nurse and pharmacist program or pharmacist program alone. Although this study tried to adjust the potential confounders as possible as we could by using propensity score analysis, further studies are needed to confirm our results.
    BMC Health Services Research 12/2015; 15(1). DOI:10.1186/s12913-015-0732-4 · 1.66 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Explicit criteria for evaluating the appropriateness of medication use among the elderly have been extensively employed in several countries. The aim of the current study was to assess and characterize the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) according to the Screening Tool of Older People's Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria and compare these data with the 2012 Beers criteria. A prospective survey of the medications used by elderly patients was performed. A total of 142 participants were randomly selected via systematic sampling. The Beers and STOPP criteria were applied to evaluate the use of PIMs among the sample. All of the medications included in these criteria were assessed for their availability in Brazil. The prevalence of PIMs was chosen as an occurrence measure and compared among the exposure group using the prevalence ratio (PR) as a measure of association. The prevalence of PIM use in the sample was 33.8% according to the STOPP criteria and 51.8% using the 2012 Beers criteria. The most prevalent PIMs according to the Beers criteria were short-acting nifedipine (17.4%) and glyburide (11.9%); according to the STOPP criteria, they were acetylsalicylic acid (32.9%), clonazepam (10.1%) and diclofenac (6.3%). The use of four or more drugs (polypharmacy) was associated with a higher prevalence of PIM use (PR = 3.11, 95% CIs = 1.65-5.85). The 2012 Beers criteria identified more PIMs than the STOPP criteria. This difference highlights the need to develop national criteria. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 02/2015; 21(2). DOI:10.1111/jep.12319 · 1.58 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
80 Downloads
Available from
May 23, 2014