Dataset Information

Evaluation of clarity of the STOPP/START criteria for clinical applicability in prescribing for older people: a quality appraisal study.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:Appropriate 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. DESIGN:Quality appraisal study. METHODS:For 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 OUTCOMES:The 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. RESULTS:STOPP 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. CONCLUSIONS:Our 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.

SUBMITTER: Sallevelt BTGM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7045170 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of clarity of the STOPP/START criteria for clinical applicability in prescribing for older people: a quality appraisal study.

Sallevelt Bastiaan Theodoor Gerard Marie BTGM Huibers Corlina Johanna Alida CJA Knol Wilma W Puijenbroek Eugene van EV Egberts Toine T Wilting Ingeborg I

BMJ open 20200218 2

<h4>Objectives</h4>Appropriate 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 appli ...[more]

PMID: 32075833

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Adverse drug events (ADEs) are common in older people and contribute significantly to emergency department (ED) visits, unplanned hospitalisations, healthcare costs, morbidity and mortality. Many ADEs are avoidable if attention is directed towards identifying and preventing inappropriate drug use and undesirable drug combinations. Tools exist to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in clinical settings, but they are underused. Applying PIP assessment tools to population-wide health administrative data could provide an opportunity to assess the impact of PIP on individual patients as well as on the healthcare system. This would open new possibilities for interventions to monitor and optimise medication management on a broader, population-level scale. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:The aim of this study is to describe the occurrence of PIP in Ontario's older population (aged 65?years and older), and to assess the health outcomes and health system costs associated with PIP-more specifically, the association between PIP and the occurrence of ED visits, hospitalisations and death, and their related costs. This will be done within the framework of a population-based retrospective cohort study using Ontario's large health administrative and population databases. Eligible patients aged 66?years and older who were issued at least 1 prescription between 1 April 2003 and 31 March 2014 (approximately 2 million patients) will be included. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethical approval was obtained from the Ottawa Health Services Network Ethical Review Board and from the Bruyère Research Institute Ethics Review Board. Dissemination will occur via publication, presentation at national and international conferences, and ongoing exchanges with regional, provincial and national stakeholders, including the Ontario Drug Policy Research Network and the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:Registered with clinicaltrials.gov (registration number: NCT02555891).

Dataset Information

Evaluation of clarity of the STOPP/START criteria for clinical applicability in prescribing for older people: a quality appraisal study.

Publications

Evaluation of clarity of the STOPP/START criteria for clinical applicability in prescribing for older people: a quality appraisal study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets