Dataset Information

The feasibility and effect of deprescribing in older adults on mortality and health: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: AIMS:Deprescribing is a suggested intervention to reverse the potential iatrogenic harms of inappropriate polypharmacy. The review aimed to determine whether or not deprescribing is a safe, effective and feasible intervention to modify mortality and health outcomes in older adults. METHODS:Specified databases were searched from inception to February 2015. Two researchers independently screened all retrieved articles for inclusion, assessed study quality and extracted data. Data were pooled using RevMan v5.3. Eligible studies included those where older adults had at least one medication deprescribed. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes were adverse drug withdrawal events, psychological and physical health outcomes, quality of life, and medication usage (e.g. successful deprescribing, number of medications prescribed, potentially inappropriate medication use). RESULTS:A total of 132 papers met the inclusion criteria, which included 34 143 participants aged 73.8 ± 5.4 years. In nonrandomized studies, deprescribing polypharmacy was shown to significantly decrease mortality (OR 0.32, 95% CI: 0.17-0.60). However, this was not statistically significant in the randomized studies (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.61-1.11). Subgroup analysis revealed patient-specific interventions to deprescribe demonstrated a significant reduction in mortality (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43-0.88). However, generalized educational programmes did not change mortality (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.86-1.69). CONCLUSIONS:Although nonrandomized data suggested that deprescribing reduces mortality, deprescribing was not shown to alter mortality in randomized studies. Mortality was significantly reduced when applying patient-specific interventions to deprescribe in randomized studies.

SUBMITTER: Page AT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5338123 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The feasibility and effect of deprescribing in older adults on mortality and health: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Page Amy T AT Clifford Rhonda M RM Potter Kathleen K Schwartz Darren D Etherton-Beer Christopher D CD

British journal of clinical pharmacology 20160613 3

<h4>Aims</h4>Deprescribing is a suggested intervention to reverse the potential iatrogenic harms of inappropriate polypharmacy. The review aimed to determine whether or not deprescribing is a safe, effective and feasible intervention to modify mortality and health outcomes in older adults.<h4>Methods</h4>Specified databases were searched from inception to February 2015. Two researchers independently screened all retrieved articles for inclusion, assessed study quality and extracted data. Data we ...[more]

PMID: 27077231

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPolypharmacy and use of inappropriate medications have been linked to increased risk of falls, hospitalizations, cognitive impairment, and death. The primary objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness, comparative effectiveness, and harms of deprescribing interventions among community-dwelling older adults.MethodsWe searched OVID MEDLINE Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library from 1990 through February 2019 for controlled clinical trials comparing any deprescribing intervention to usual care or another intervention. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, hospitalizations, health-related quality of life, and falls. The secondary outcome was use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). Interventions were categorized as comprehensive medication review, educational initiatives, and computerized decision support. Data abstracted by one investigator were verified by another. We used the Cochrane criteria to rate risk of bias for each study and the GRADE system to determine certainty of evidence (COE) for primary outcomes.ResultsThirty-eight low and medium risk of bias clinical trials were included. Comprehensive medication review may have reduced all-cause mortality (OR 0.74, 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.95, I2 = 0, k = 12, low COE) but probably had little to no effect on falls, health-related quality of life, or hospitalizations (low to moderate COE). Nine of thirteen trials reported fewer PIMs in the intervention group. Educational interventions probably had little to no effect on all-cause mortality, hospitalizations, or health-related quality of life (low to moderate COE). The effect on falls was uncertain (very low COE). All 11 education trials that included PIMs reported fewer in the intervention than in the control groups. Two of 4 computerized decision support trials reported fewer PIMs in the intervention arms; none included any primary outcomes.DiscussionIn community-dwelling people aged 65 years and older, medication deprescribing interventions may provide small reductions in mortality and use of potentially inappropriate medications.Registry informationPROSPERO - CRD42019132420.

Project description:BackgroundDeprescribing, a relatively recent concept, has been proposed as a promising solution to the growing issues of polypharmacy and use of medications of questionable benefit among older adults. However, little is known about the health outcomes of deprescribing interventions.ObjectiveThis paper presents the protocol of a study that aims to contribute to the knowledge on deprescribing by addressing two specific objectives: (1) describe the impact of deprescribing in adults ≥60 years on health outcomes or quality of life; and (2) determine the characteristics of effective interventions in deprescribing.MethodsPrimary studies targeting three concepts (older adults, deprescribing, and health or quality of life outcomes) will be included in the review. The search will be performed using key international databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Ageline, PsycInfo), and a special effort will be made to identify gray literature. Two reviewers will independently screen the articles, extract the information, and evaluate the quality of the selected studies. If methodologically feasible, meta-analyses will be performed for groups of intervention studies reporting on deprescribing interventions for similar medications, used for similar or identical indications, and reporting on similar outcomes (eg, benzodiazepines used against insomnia and studies reporting on quality of sleep or quality of life). Alternatively, the results will be presented in bottom-line statements (objective 1) and a matrix outlining effective interventions (objective 2).ResultsThe knowledge synthesis may be limited by the availability of high-quality clinical trials on deprescribing and their outcomes in older adults. Additionally, analyses will likely be affected by studies on the deprescribing of different types of molecules within the same indication (eg, different pharmacological classes and medications to treat hypertension) and different measures of health and quality of life outcomes for the same indication. Nevertheless, we expect the review to identify which deprescribing interventions lead to improved health outcomes among seniors and which of their characteristics contribute to these outcomes.ConclusionsThis systematic review will contribute to a better understanding of the health outcomes of deprescribing interventions among seniors.Trial registrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42015020866; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42015020866.International registered report identifier (irrid)PRR1-10.2196/25200.

Project description:BackgroundWith rapidly aging populations in most parts of the world, it is only natural that the need for caregivers for older adults is going to increase in the near future. Therefore, most technologically proficient countries are in the process of using artificial intelligence (AI) to build socially assistive robots (SAR) to play the role of caregivers in enhancing interaction and social participation among older adults.ObjectiveThis study aimed to examine the effect of intervention through AI SAR on the cognitive function of older adults through a systematic literature review.MethodsWe conducted a meta-analysis of the various existing studies on the effect of AI SAR on the cognitive function of older adults to standardize the results and clarify the effect of each method and indicator. Cochrane collaboration and the systematic literature review flow of PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Item Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) were used on original, peer-reviewed studies published from January 2010 to March 2022. The search words were derived by combining keywords including Population, Intervention, and Outcome-according to the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Time, Setting, and Study Design principle-for the question "What is the effect of AI SAR on the cognitive function of older adults in comparison with a control group?" (Population: adults aged ≥65 years; Intervention: AI SAR; Comparison: comparison group; Outcome: popular function; and Study Design: prospective study). For any study, if one condition among subjects, intervention, comparison, or study design was different from those indicated, the study was excluded from the literature review.ResultsIn total, 9 studies were selected (6 randomized controlled trials and 3 quasi-experimental design studies) for the meta-analysis. Publication bias was examined using the contour-enhanced funnel plot method to confirm the reliability and validity of the 9 studies. The meta-analysis revealed that the average effect size of AI SAR was shown to be Hedges g=0.43 (95% CI -0.04 to 0.90), indicating that AI SAR are effective in reducing the Mini Mental State Examination scale, which reflects cognitive function.ConclusionsThe 9 studies that were analyzed used SAR in the form of animals, robots, and humans. Among them, AI SAR in anthropomorphic form were able to improve cognitive function more effectively. The development and expansion of AI SAR programs to various functions including health notification, play therapy, counseling service, conversation, and dementia prevention programs are expected to improve the quality of care for older adults and prevent the overload of caregivers. AI SAR can be considered a representative, digital, and social prescription program and a nonpharmacological intervention program that communicates with older adults 24 hours a day. Despite its effectiveness, ethical issues, the digital literacy needs of older adults, social awareness and reliability, and technological advancement pose challenges in implementing AI SAR. Future research should include bigger sample sizes, pre-post studies, as well as studies using an older adult control group.

Project description:BackgroundHome visits for older adults aim to prevent cognitive and functional impairment, thus reducing institutionalization and mortality. Visitors may provide information, investigate untreated problems, encourage medication compliance, and provide referrals to services.Methods and findingsData sourcesTen databases including CENTRAL and Medline searched through December 2012.Study selectionRandomized controlled trials enrolling community-dwelling persons without dementia aged over 65 years. Interventions included visits at home by a health or social care professional that were not related to hospital discharge.Data extraction and synthesisTwo authors independently extracted data. Outcomes were pooled using random effects.Main outcomes and measuresMortality, institutionalization, hospitalization, falls, injuries, physical functioning, cognitive functioning, quality of life, and psychiatric illness.ResultsSixty-four studies with 28642 participants were included. Home visits were not associated with absolute reductions in mortality at longest follow-up, but some programs may have small relative effects (relative risk?=?0.93 [0.87 to 0.99]; absolute risk?=?0.00 [-0.01 to 0.00]). There was moderate quality evidence of no overall effect on the number of people institutionalized (RR?=?1.02 [0.88 to 1.18]) or hospitalized (RR?=?0.96 [0.91 to 1.01]). There was high quality evidence for number of people who fell, which is consistent with no effect or a small effect (odds ratio?=?0.86 [0.73 to 1.01]), but there was no evidence that these interventions increased independent living. There was low and very low quality evidence of effects for quality of life (standardised mean difference?=?-0.06 [-0.11 to -0.01]) and physical functioning (SMD?=?-0.10 [-0.17 to -0.03]) respectively, but these may not be clinically important.ConclusionsHome visiting is not consistently associated with differences in mortality or independent living, and investigations of heterogeneity did not identify any programs that are associated with consistent benefits. Due to poor reporting of intervention components and delivery, we cannot exclude the possibility that some programs may be effective.

Project description:Background and aimsAdvice to drink plenty of fluid is common in respiratory infections. We assessed whether low fluid intake (dehydration) altered outcomes in adults with pneumonia.MethodsWe systematically reviewed trials increasing fluid intake and well-adjusted, well-powered observational studies assessing associations between markers of low-intake dehydration (fluid intake, serum osmolality, urea or blood urea nitrogen, urinary output, signs of dehydration) and mortality in adult pneumonia patients (with any type of pneumonia, including community acquired, health-care acquired, aspiration, COVID-19 and mixed types). Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, references of reviews and included studies were searched to 30/10/2020. Studies were assessed for inclusion, risk of bias and data extracted independently in duplicate. We employed random-effects meta-analysis, sensitivity analyses, subgrouping and GRADE assessment. Prospero registration: CRD42020182599.ResultsWe identified one trial, 20 well-adjusted cohort studies and one case-control study. None suggested that more fluid (hydration) was associated with harm. Ten of 13 well-powered observational studies found statistically significant positive associations in adjusted analyses between dehydration and medium-term mortality. The other three studies found no significant effect. Meta-analysis suggested doubled odds of medium-term mortality in dehydrated (compared to hydrated) pneumonia patients (GRADE moderate-quality evidence, OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.8 to 2.8, 8619 deaths in 128,319 participants). Heterogeneity was explained by a dose effect (greater dehydration increased risk of mortality further), and the effect was consistent across types of pneumonia (including community-acquired, hospital-acquired, aspiration, nursing and health-care associated, and mixed pneumonia), age and setting (community or hospital). The single trial found that educating pneumonia patients to drink ≥1.5 L fluid/d alongside lifestyle advice increased fluid intake and reduced subsequent healthcare use. No studies in COVID-19 pneumonia met the inclusion criteria, but 70% of those hospitalised with COVID-19 have pneumonia. Smaller COVID-19 studies suggested that hydration is as important in COVID-19 pneumonia mortality as in other pneumonias.ConclusionsWe found consistent moderate-quality evidence mainly from observational studies that improving hydration reduces the risk of medium-term mortality in all types of pneumonia. It is remarkable that while many studies included dehydration as a potential confounder, and major pneumonia risk scores include measures of hydration, optimal fluid volume and the effect of supporting hydration have not been assessed in randomised controlled trials of people with pneumonia. Such trials, are needed as potential benefits may be large, rapid and implemented at low cost. Supporting hydration and reversing dehydration has the potential to have rapid positive impacts on pneumonia outcomes, and perhaps also COVID-19 pneumonia outcomes, in older adults.

Project description:BackgroundPolypharmacy, and the associated adverse drug events such as non-adherence to prescriptions, is a common problem for elderly people living with multiple comorbidities. Deprescribing, i.e. the gradual withdrawal from medications with supervision by a healthcare professional, is regarded as a means of reducing adverse effects of multiple medications including non-adherence. This systematic review examines the evidence of deprescribing as an effective strategy for improving medication adherence amongst older, community dwelling adults.MethodsA mixed methods review was undertaken. Eight bibliographic database and two clinical trials registers were searched between May and December 2017. Results were double screened in accordance with pre-defined inclusion/exclusion criteria related to polypharmacy, deprescribing and adherence in older, community dwelling populations. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used for quality appraisal and an a priori data collection instrument was used. For the quantitative studies, a narrative synthesis approach was taken. The qualitative data was analysed using framework analysis. Findings were integrated using a mixed methods technique. The review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA reporting statement.ResultsA total of 22 original studies were included, of which 12 were RCTs. Deprescribing with adherence as an outcome measure was identified in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), observational and cohort studies from 13 countries between 1996 and 2017. There were 17 pharmacy-led interventions; others were led by General Practitioners (GP) and nurses. Four studies demonstrated an overall reduction in medications of which all studies corresponded with improved adherence. A total of thirteen studies reported improved adherence of which 5 were RCTs. Adherence was reported as a secondary outcome in all but one study.ConclusionsThere is insufficient evidence to show that deprescribing improves medication adherence. Only 13 studies (of 22) reported adherence of which only 5 were randomised controlled trials. Older people are particularly susceptible to non-adherence due to multi-morbidity associated with polypharmacy. Bio-psycho-social factors including health literacy and multi-disciplinary team interventions influence adherence. The authors recommend further study into the efficacy and outcomes of medicines management interventions. A consensus on priority outcome measurements for prescribed medications is indicated.Trial registrationPROSPERO number CRD42017075315.

Dataset Information

The feasibility and effect of deprescribing in older adults on mortality and health: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

The feasibility and effect of deprescribing in older adults on mortality and health: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets