Correction: STOPP/START criteria for potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people: version 3.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: O'Mahony D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10447589 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Correction: STOPP/START criteria for potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people: version 3.
O'Mahony Denis D Cherubini Antonio A Guiteras Anna Renom AR Denkinger Michael M Beuscart Jean-Baptiste JB Onder Graziano G Gudmundsson Adalsteinn A Cruz-Jentoft Alfonso J AJ Knol Wilma W Bahat Gülistan G van der Velde Nathalie N Petrovic Mirko M Curtin Denis D
European geriatric medicine 20230801 4
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeSTOPP/START is a physiological systems-based explicit set of criteria that attempts to define the clinically important prescribing problems relating to potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs-STOPP criteria) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs-START criteria). The previous two versions of STOPP/START criteria were published in 2008 and 2015. The present study describes the revised and updated third version of the criteria.MethodsA detailed system-by-system review of the published literature from April 2014 to March 2022 was undertaken with the aim of including clinically important new explicit PIM and PPO criteria and removing any criteria considered to be no longer correct or outdated. A panel of 11 academic physicians with recognized expertise in geriatric pharmacotherapy from 8 European countries participated in a Delphi panel with the task of validating the draft criteria. The panel was presented with the draft new criteria using the SurveyMonkey® on-line platform in which panelists were asked to indicate their level of agreement on a five-point Likert scale.ResultsTwo hundred and four evidence-based draft criteria (one hundred and forty-five STOPP criteria, fifty-nine START criteria) were presented to panelists for assessment using the Delphi validation method. Over the course of four rounds of Delphi validation, the panel achieved consensus on 133 STOPP criteria and 57 START criteria, i.e., 190 STOPP/START criteria in total representing a 66.7% increase in the number of criteria compared to STOPP/START version 2 published in 2015.ConclusionA fully revised and updated version of STOPP/START criteria has been validated by a European expert panel using the Delphi consensus process.
| S-EPMC10447584 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeScreening 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsThe 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.ConclusionSTOPP/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.
| S-EPMC4339726 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveRational prescribing in older people is a priority for health care organizations. The STOPP/START screening tool has been developed to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in individuals. In a primary care setting, STOPP/START can estimate PIP prevalence and related factors at population level. The aim of this study is to measure the prevalence rates of PPI in elderly population using clinical and prescription claim databases.DesignCross-sectional population study.SettingsPrimary Care, Lleida Health Region, Spain.Participants45.408 patients 70 years old and over, attended in the primary health care centers at least once the last year.Methods43 STOPP and 12 START criteria are applied to their 2012 clinical and prescription records. Logistic regression models are adjusted to determine PIP association with several factors.Results45,408 patients are included. The mean age is 79.7 years, 58% being female. The overall prevalence of PPI is 58.1%. According to STOPP, the most common drugs identified are benzodiazepines, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and proton pump inhibitors; according to START, osteoporosis treatments, antiplatelet agents, statins, metformin and beta blockers. PIP increases with age and polypharmacy and it is higher in long-term care facilities residents and patients receiving home health care.ConclusionsIn our Health Region, at least 50% of the population aged 70 or older has one or more PIP, according to STOPP/START criteria.
| S-EPMC6875995 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo investigate prevalence, independent associations, and variation over time of potentially inappropriate prescriptions in a population of older hospitalized patients.MethodsA longitudinal study using a large dataset of hospital admissions of older patients (≥ 70 years) based on an electronic health records cohort including data from 2015 to 2019. Potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) and potential prescribing omission (PPO) prevalence during hospital stay were identified based on the Dutch STOPP/START criteria v2. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used for analyzing associations and trends over time.ResultsThe data included 16,687 admissions. Of all admissions, 56% had ≥ 1 PIM and 58% had ≥ 1 PPO. Gender, age, number of medications, number of diagnoses, Charlson score, and length of stay were independently associated with both PIMs and PPOs. Additionally, number of departments and number of prescribing specialties were independently associated with PIMs. Over the years, the PIM prevalence did not change (OR = 1.00, p = .95), whereas PPO prevalence increased (OR = 1.08, p < .001). However, when corrected for changes in patient characteristics such as number of diagnoses, the PIM (aOR = 0.91, p < .001) and PPO prevalence (aOR = 0.94, p < .001) decreased over the years.ConclusionWe found potentially inappropriate prescriptions in the majority of admissions of older patients. Prescribing relatively improved over time when considering complexity of the admissions. Nevertheless, the high prevalence shows a clear need to better address this issue in clinical practice. Studies seeking effective (re)prescribing interventions are warranted.
| S-EPMC8032616 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe objectives of the present analyses are to estimate the frequency of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) at admission according to STOPP/START criteria version 2 in older patients hospitalised due to chronic disease exacerbation as well as to identify risk factors associated to the most frequent active principles as potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs).MethodsA multicentre, prospective cohort study including older patients (≥65) hospitalized due to chronic disease exacerbation at the internal medicine or geriatric services of 5 hospitals in Spain between September 2016 and December 2018 was conducted. Demographic and clinical data was collected, and a medication review process using STOPP/START criteria version 2 was performed, considering both PIMs and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs). Primary outcome was defined as the presence of any most frequent principles as PIMs, and secondary outcomes were the frequency of any PIM and PPO. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were conducted on all outcomes and multilevel logistic regression analysis, stratified by participating centre, was performed on the primary outcome.ResultsA total of 740 patients were included (mean age 84.1, 53.2% females), 93.8% of them presenting polypharmacy, with a median of 10 chronic prescriptions. Among all, 603 (81.5%) patients presented at least one PIP, 542 (73.2%) any PIM and 263 (35.5%) any PPO. Drugs prescribed without an evidence-based clinical indication were the most frequent PIM (33.8% of patients); vitamin D supplement in older people who are housebound or experiencing falls or with osteopenia was the most frequent PPO (10.3%). The most frequent active principles as PIMs were proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and benzodiazepines (BZDs), present in 345 (46.6%) patients. This outcome was found significantly associated with age, polypharmacy and essential tremor in an explanatory model with 71% AUC.ConclusionsPIMs at admission are highly prevalent in these patients, especially those involving PPIs or BZDs, which affected almost half of the patients. Therefore, these drugs may be considered as the starting point for medication review and deprescription.Trial registration numberNCT02830425.
| S-EPMC8751453 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThis study aims to determine if potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is associated with increased healthcare utilization, functional decline and reduced quality of life (QoL) in a community-dwelling older cohort.MethodThis prospective cohort study included participants aged ≥65 years from The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA) with linked administrative pharmacy claims data who were followed up after 2 years. PIP was defined by the Screening Tool for Older Persons Prescriptions (STOPP) and Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (START). The association with number of emergency department (ED) visits and GP visits reported over 12 months was analyzed using multivariate negative binomial regression adjusting for confounders. Marginal structural models investigated the presence of time-dependent confounding.ResultsOf participants followed up (n = 1753), PIP was detected in 57% by STOPP and 41.8% by START, 21.7% reported an ED visit and 96.1% visited a GP (median 4, IQR 2.5-6). Those with any STOPP criterion had higher rates of ED visits (adjusted incident rate ratio (IRR) 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02, 1.66) and GP visits (IRR 1.15, 95%CI 1.06, 1.24). Patients with two or more START criteria had significantly more ED visits (IRR 1.45, 95%CI 1.03, 2.04) and GP visits (IRR 1.13, 95%CI 1.01, 1.27) than people with no criteria. Adjusting for time-dependent confounding did not affect the findings.ConclusionsBoth STOPP and START were independently associated with increased healthcare utilization and START was also related to functional decline and QoL. Optimizing prescribing to reduce PIP may provide an improvement in patient outcomes.
| S-EPMC5338119 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and inappropriate prescribing are significant challenges in the geriatric population. Tools such as the Beers List, FORTA, and STOPP/START criteria have been developed to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP). STOPP/START criteria detect both potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs). The latest, third version of STOPP/START criteria expands the tool, based on the growing literature. The study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of PIP and the number of PIP per person identified by STOPP/START version 3 and to compare it to the previous version. Methods: This retrospective, cross-sectional study enrolled one hundred geriatric patients with polypharmacy from two day-care centers for partially dependent people in Poland. Collected data included demographic and medical data. STOPP/START version 3 was used to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing, whereas the previous version served as a reference. Results: STOPP version 3 detected at least one PIM in 73% of the study group, a significantly higher result than that for version 2 (56%). STOPP version 3 identified more PIMs per person than the previous version. Similarly, START version 3 had a significantly higher prevalence of PPOs (74% vs. 57%) and a higher number of PPOs per person than the previous version. The newly formed STOPP criteria with high prevalence were those regarding NSAIDs, including aspirin in cardiovascular indications. Frequent PPOs regarding newly formed START criteria were the lack of osmotic laxatives for chronic constipation, the lack of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and SGLT-2 inhibitors in heart failure. Conclusions: This study showed the high effectiveness of the STOPP/START version 3 criteria in identifying potentially inappropriate prescribing, with a higher detection rate than version 2.
| S-EPMC11508511 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Rational use of medications and monitoring of prescriptions in elderly patients is important to decrease the number and duration of hospitalizations, emergency medical consultations, mortality, as well as medical costs. Purpose:To identify potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescription omissions (PPOs), and determine their prevalence based on the Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) v2 criteria and Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (START) v2 criteria for patients aged >65 years. Methods:This cross-sectional study was conducted in two rural counties in Romania based on electronic prescriptions for chronic conditions (EPCCs) issued from 30 days to 90 days by a specialist or general practitioner. Collected EPCCs were evaluated by an interdisciplinary team of specialists based on 26 STOPP v2 criteria and 10 START v2 criteria. Results:PIM prevalence was 25.80% and PPO prevalence was 41.72% for 646 EPCCs. The mean age of patients was 75 years and the mean number of drugs per EPCC was four. The most frequently identified PIMs were treatment duration (6.65%), theophylline administration (5.72%), drug indication (4.64%), cyclo-oxygenase-2 non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (1.39%), and zopiclone prescription (0.77%). Statins (24.76%), beta-blockers (8.04%), and beta-2 agonist/antimuscarinic bronchodilators (5.88%) were the most frequently identified PPOs. Conclusion:PPOs were more prevalent than PIMs for elderly populations living in the two rural counties in Romania we studied. Health practitioners (family physicians, specialists, and pharmacists) should focus on prophylactic and curative considerations when prescribing agents to decrease the morbidity and mortality of elderly rural Romanian patients.
| S-EPMC7090181 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeMultimorbidity and polypharmacy in older adults converts the detection and adequacy of potentially inappropriate drug prescriptions (PIDP) in a healthcare priority. The objectives of this study are to describe the clinical decisions taken after the identification of PIDP by clinical pharmacists, using STOPP/START criteria, and to evaluate the degree of accomplishment of these decisions.MethodsMulticenter, prospective, non-comparative cohort study in patients aged 65 and older, hospitalized because of an exacerbation of their chronic conditions. Each possible PIDP was manually identified by the clinical pharmacist at admission and an initial decision was taken by a multidisciplinary clinical committee. At discharge, criteria were re-applied and final decisions recorded.ResultsFrom all patients (n = 674), 493 (73.1%) presented at least one STOPP criteria at admission, significantly reduced up to 258 (38.3%) at discharge. A similar trend was observed for START criteria (36.7% vs. 15.7%). Regarding the top 10 most prevalent STOPP criteria, the clinical committee initially agreed to withdraw 257 (34.2%) prescriptions and to modify 93 (12.4%) prescriptions. However, the evaluation of final clinical decisions revealed that 503 (67.0%) of those STOPP criteria were ultimately amended. For the top 10 START criteria associated PIDP, the committee decided to initiate 149 (51.7%) prescriptions, while a total of 198 (68.8%) were finally introduced at discharge.ConclusionsThe clinical committee, through a pharmacotherapy review, succeeded in identifying and reducing the degree of prescription inadequacy, for both STOPP and START criteria, in older patients with high degree of multimorbidity and polypharmacy.Trial registrationNCT02830425.
| S-EPMC11232270 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesAppropriate prescribing in older people continues to be challenging. Studies still report a high prevalence of inappropriate prescribing in older people. To reduce the problem of underprescribing and overprescribing in this population, explicit drug optimisation tools like Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (STOPP/START) have been developed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical applicability of STOPP/START criteria in daily patient care by assessing the clarity of singular criteria.DesignQuality appraisal study.MethodsFor each of the 114 STOPP/START criteria V.2, elements describing the action (what/how to do), condition (when to do) and explanation (why to do) were identified. Next, the clarity of these three elements was quantified on a 7-point Likert scale using tools provided by the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) Consortium.Primary and secondary outcomesThe primary outcome measure was the clarity rating per element, categorised into high (>67.7%), moderate (33.3%-67.7%) or low (<33.3%). Secondary, factors that positively or negatively affected clarity most were identified. Additionally, the nature of the conditions was further classified into five descriptive components: disease, sign, symptom, laboratory finding and medication.ResultsSTOPP recommendations had an average clarity rating of 64%, 60% and 69% for actions, conditions and explanations, respectively. The average clarity rating in START recommendations was 60% and 57% for actions and conditions, respectively. There were no statements present to substantiate the prescription of potential omissions for the 34 START criteria.ConclusionsOur results show that the clarity of the STOPP/START criteria can be improved. For future development of explicit drug optimisation tools, such as STOPP/START, our findings identified facilitators (high clarity) and barriers (low clarity) that can be used to improve the clarity of clinical practice guidelines on a language level and therefore enhance clinical applicability.
| S-EPMC7045170 | biostudies-literature