Dataset Information

Patient-Reported Barriers and Facilitators to Deprescribing Cardiovascular Medications.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Medications endorsed by clinical practice guidelines, such as cardiovascular medications, could still have risks that outweigh potential benefits, and could thus warrant deprescribing. OBJECTIVES:The objective of this study was to develop a framework of facilitators and barriers specific to deprescribing cardiovascular medications in the setting of uncertain benefit. Given the frequent use of ?-blockers in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, and its uncertain benefits with potential for harm, we used this scenario as an example case for a cardiovascular medication that may be reasonable to deprescribe. METHODS:We conducted one-on-one, semi-structured interviews of older adults until we reached thematic saturation. Two coders independently reviewed each interview, and developed codes using deductive thematic analysis based on a prior conceptual framework for deprescribing. Subthemes and themes were finalized with a third coder. RESULTS:Ten participants were interviewed. We identified three key previously described patient-reported facilitators to deprescribing: (1) appropriateness of cessation; (2) process of cessation; and (3) dislike of medications; and identified three key previously described patient-reported barriers: (1) appropriateness of cessation; (2) process of cessation; and (3) fear. We found that these facilitators and barriers often co-occurred within the same individual. This observation, coupled with subthemes from our patient interviews, yielded two barriers to deprescribing specific to cardiovascular medications-uncertainty and conflicting attitudes. CONCLUSION:We adapted a new framework of patient-reported barriers and facilitators specific to deprescribing cardiovascular medications. In addition to addressing barriers previously described, future deprescribing interventions targeting cardiovascular medications must also address uncertainty and conflicting attitudes.

SUBMITTER: Goyal P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7339041 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient-Reported Barriers and Facilitators to Deprescribing Cardiovascular Medications.

Goyal Parag P Requijo Tatiana T Siceloff Birgit B Shen Megan J MJ Masterson Creber Ruth R Hilmer Sarah N SN Kronish Ian M IM Lachs Mark S MS Safford Monika M MM

Drugs & aging 20200201 2

<h4>Background</h4>Medications endorsed by clinical practice guidelines, such as cardiovascular medications, could still have risks that outweigh potential benefits, and could thus warrant deprescribing.<h4>Objectives</h4>The objective of this study was to develop a framework of facilitators and barriers specific to deprescribing cardiovascular medications in the setting of uncertain benefit. Given the frequent use of β-blockers in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, and its uncertai ...[more]

PMID: 31858449

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Managing polypharmacy is a challenge for healthcare systems globally. It is also a health inequality concern as it can expose some of the most vulnerable in society to unnecessary medications and adverse drug-related events. Care for most patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy occurs in primary care. Safe deprescribing interventions can reduce exposure to inappropriate polypharmacy. However, these are not fully accepted or routinely implemented. AIM:To identify barriers and facilitators to safe deprescribing interventions for adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy in primary care. DESIGN & SETTING:A systematic review of studies published from 2000, examining safe deprescribing interventions for adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. METHOD:A search of electronic databases: MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINHAL), Cochrane, and Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC) from inception to 26 Feb 2019, using an agreed search strategy. This was supplemented by handsearching of relevant journals, and screening of reference lists and citations of included studies. RESULTS:In total, 40 studies from 14 countries were identified. Cultural and organisational barriers included: a culture of diagnosing and prescribing; evidence-based guidance focused on single diseases; a lack of evidence-based guidance for the care of older people with multimorbidities; and a lack of shared communication, decision-making systems, tools, and resources. Interpersonal and individual-level barriers included: professional etiquette; fragmented care; prescribers' and patients' uncertainties; and gaps in tailored support. Facilitators included: prudent prescribing; greater availability and acceptability of non-pharmacological alternatives; resources; improved communication, collaboration, knowledge, and understanding; patient-centred care; and shared decision-making. CONCLUSION:A whole systems, patient-centred approach to safe deprescribing interventions is required, involving key decision-makers, healthcare professionals, patients, and carers.

Project description:Background/objectivesGuideline-based management of cardiovascular disease often involves prescribing multiple medications, which contributes to polypharmacy and risk for adverse drug events in older adults. Deprescribing is a potential strategy to mitigate these risks. We sought to characterize and compare clinician perspectives regarding deprescribing cardiovascular medications across three specialties.DesignNational cross-sectional survey.SettingAmbulatory.ParticipantsRandom sample of geriatricians, general internists, and cardiologists from the American College of Physicians.MeasurementsElectronic survey assessing clinical practice of deprescribing cardiovascular medications, reasons and barriers to deprescribing, and choice of medications to deprescribe in hypothetical clinical cases.ResultsIn each specialty, 750 physicians were surveyed, with a response rate of 26% for geriatricians, 26% for general internists, and 12% for cardiologists. Over 80% of respondents within each specialty reported that they had recently considered deprescribing a cardiovascular medication. Adverse drug reactions were the most common reason for deprescribing for all specialties. Geriatricians also commonly reported deprescribing in the setting of limited life expectancy. Barriers to deprescribing were shared across specialties and included concerns about interfering with other physicians' treatment plans and patient reluctance. In hypothetical cases, over 90% of physicians in each specialty chose to deprescribe when patients experienced adverse drug reactions. Geriatricians were most likely and cardiologists were least likely to consider deprescribing cardiovascular medications in cases of limited life expectancy (all P < .001), such as recurrent metastatic cancer (84% of geriatricians, 68% of general internists, and 45% of cardiologists), Alzheimer dementia (92% of geriatricians, 81% of general internists, and 59% of cardiologists), or significant functional impairment (83% of geriatricians, 68% of general internists, and 45% of cardiologists).ConclusionsWhile barriers to deprescribing cardiovascular medications are shared across specialties, reasons for deprescribing, especially in the setting of limited life expectancy, varied. Implementing deprescribing will require improved processes for both physician-physician and physician-patient communication. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:78-86, 2019.

Project description:Patient reports of their adherence behaviors, concerns about statins, and perceptions of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk could inform approaches for improving adherence to statin therapy. We examined these factors and their associations with adherence.We conducted telephone interviews among a stratified random sample of adults receiving statins within an integrated delivery system (N = 730, 81% response rate) in 2010. We sampled equal numbers of individuals in three clinical risk categories: those with 1) coronary artery disease; 2) diabetes or other ASCVD diagnosis; and 3) no diabetes or ASCVD diagnoses. We assessed 15 potential concerns about and barriers to taking statins, and perceived risk of having a heart attack in the next 10 years (0-10 scale). We calculated the proportion of days covered (PDC) by statins in the last 12 months using dispensing data and used multivariate logistic regression to examine the characteristics associated with non-adherence (PDC<80%). Analyses were weighted for sampling proportions.Sixty-one percent of patients with PDC<50% reported not filling a new prescription, splitting or skipping statins, or stopping refilling statins in the last 12 months vs. 15% of those with PDC?80% (p<0.05). The most commonly reported concerns about statins were preferring to lower cholesterol with lifestyle changes (66%), disliking medications in general (59%), and liver or kidney problems (31%); having trouble remembering to take statins (9%) was the most common reason for taking less than prescribed. In multivariate analyses, clinical risk categories were not significantly associated with odds of non-adherence; however, those with higher perceived risk of heart attack were less likely to be non-adherent.Patient-reported medication-taking behaviors were correlated with statin PDC and those with lower perceived cardiovascular risk were less likely to be adherent. These findings highlight the importance of eliciting from and educating patients on their adherence behaviors and ASCVD risks.

Project description:We investigated reasons for non-treatment of osteoporosis and discontinuation of osteoporosis therapy. Barriers to treatment include patients' preference for alternative treatments and a fear of possible side effects. Side effects are a common reason for treatment discontinuation, and they may be associated with a lack of willingness to restart treatment.Osteoporosis patients commonly cite treatment-related side effects, or the fear thereof, as a reason for discontinuing or not initiating anti-osteoporosis medications. The purpose of this study was to investigate, from the patient's perspective, reasons for (i) non-treatment of osteoporosis and (ii) discontinuation of osteoporosis therapy.This was an internet-based survey of postmenopausal women in the USA who self-reported having been diagnosed with osteoporosis. Respondents were recruited from consumer research panels and received nominal compensation.Within the surveyed population (N?=?1407), 581 patients were currently being treated, 503 had never been treated, and 323 had previously been treated. Among patients never treated for osteoporosis, the highest ranking reasons for non-treatment were the use of alternative treatments such as over-the-counter vitamins/supplements (57.5 % of respondents) and fear of side effects (43.9 %). Among previously treated patients, frequent reasons for discontinuation included the direction of the physician (41.2 % of respondents), concerns about long-term safety (30.3 %), and the experience of side effects (29.8 %). When asked about their willingness to restart their osteoporosis medication, previously treated patients who were not willing (N?=?104) to restart had a higher frequency of experiencing side effects (44.2 versus 20.5 % of those willing; P?<?0.001).From the osteoporosis patient's perspective, barriers to prescription treatment include a preference for alternative, non-prescription treatments and a fear of possible side effects. Side effects are one of the most common reasons for discontinuing osteoporosis medications, and they appear to be associated with a lack of willingness to restart treatment.

Project description:BackgroundDespite evidence that medications to treat opioid use disorder (OUD) are effective, most people who could benefit from this treatment do not receive it. This rapid review synthesizes evidence on current barriers and facilitators to buprenorphine/naloxone and naltrexone at the patient, provider, and system levels to inform future interventions aimed at expanding treatment.MethodsWe systematically searched numerous bibliographic databases through May 2020 and selected studies published since 2014. Study selection, data abstraction, coding of barriers and facilitators, and quality assessment were first completed by one reviewer and checked by a second.ResultsWe included 40 studies of buprenorphine (5 also discussed naltrexone). Four types of patient and provider-level barriers to OUD medication use emerged-stigma related to OUD medications, treatment experiences and beliefs (positive or negative), logistical issues (time and costs as well as insurance and regulatory requirements), and knowledge (high or low) of OUD and the role of medications. Stigma was the most common barrier among patients, while logistical issues were the most common barriers among providers. Facilitators for both patients and providers included peer supports. Most administrator-identified or system-level barriers and facilitators fit into the category of logistical issues. We have moderate confidence in buprenorphine findings but low confidence in naltrexone findings due to the small number of studies.DiscussionStigma, treatment experiences, logistical issues, and knowledge gaps are the main barriers associated with low utilization of OUD medications. These barriers can overlap and mutually reinforce each other, but given that, it is plausible that reducing one barrier may lead to reductions in others. The highest priority for future research is to evaluate interventions to reduce stigma. Other priorities for future research include better identification of barriers and facilitators for specific populations, such as those with OUD related to prescription opioids, and for naltrexone use.Protocol registrationPROSPERO; CRD42019133394.

Project description:BackgroundThere is increasing interest in using Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) within organisations delivering health related services. However, organisations have had mixed success in implementing PROMs and there is little understanding about why this may be. Thus, the purpose of this study was to identify the facilitators and barriers to implementing PROMs in organisations.MethodA systematic review of reviews was undertaken. Searches were conducted of five electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, during the week of the 20th February 2017. Additional search methods included website searching and reference checking. To be included, a publication had to be a review of the literature, describe its methods and include information related to implementing PROMs. The reviews were extracted using a standardised form and assessed for their risk of bias using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews tool. The findings were synthesised using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. The protocol was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews database (PROSPERO) (CRD42017057491).ResultsInitially 2047 records were identified. After assessing eligibility, six reviews were included. These reviews varied in their review type and focus. Different issues arose at distinct stages of the implementation process. Organisations needed to invest time and resources in two key stages early in the implementation process: 'designing' the processes for using PROMs within an organisation; and 'preparing' an organisation and its staff. The 'designing' stage involved organisations planning not just which PROMs to use and how to administer them, but also how the data would be used for clinical purposes. The 'preparing' stage involved getting an organisation and its staff ready to use PROMs, particularly persuading clinicians of the validity and value of PROMs, delivering training, and developing electronic systems. Having an implementation lead overseeing the process and developing the process based on feedback were also identified as facilitating implementation.ConclusionOrganisations implementing PROMs need to invest time and resources in 'designing' the PROMs strategy and 'preparing' the organisation to use PROMs. Focusing on these earlier stages may prevent problems arising when PROMs are used in practice.

Dataset Information

Patient-Reported Barriers and Facilitators to Deprescribing Cardiovascular Medications.

Publications

Patient-Reported Barriers and Facilitators to Deprescribing Cardiovascular Medications.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure