Dataset Information

Deprescribing tool for use in older Australians with life-limiting illnesses and limited life expectancy: a modified-Delphi study protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Making a meaningful decision on deprescribing of potentially inappropriate medications in older adults with life-limiting illnesses (LLIs) and limited life expectancy (LLE) is often challenging. Therefore, we aimed to elicit opinion and gain consensus on a deprescribing tool for use in this population.

Methods and analysis

A modified-Delphi method will be used to obtain a consensus from a panel of experts in geriatric therapeutics on a deprescribing tool for use in people aged ≥65 years with LLIs and LLE. Through an online survey, in the initial round, the panel will anonymously elicit their opinion on a series of items related to the conceptual model of the deprescribing tool, its practicality and deprescribing of medications, while on the controlled feedback in subsequent rounds till a consensus is reached or the panellists stop revising their answers. In each round, panel members will be using a 5-point Likert scale to rate their agreement with the statement. Consensus will be considered on ≥75% of agreement on the statements.

Ethics and dissemination

All the participants will receive an invitation and participant information but they need to consent for the participation. Ethics approval has been granted from the University of Queensland Health and Behavioural Sciences, Low and Negligible Risk Ethics Sub-Committee (reference: 2020001069). The results of this project will be disseminated through conferences and a peer-reviewed clinical journal.

SUBMITTER: Shrestha S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8021743 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Antipsychotic medications are frequently prescribed to critically ill patients leading to their continuation at transitions of care thereafter. The aim of this study was to generate evidence-informed consensus statements with key stakeholders on antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing for ICU patients.DesignWe completed three rounds of surveys in a National modified Delphi consensus process. During rounds 1 and 2, participants used a 9-point Likert scale (1-strongly disagree, 9-strongly agree) to rate perceptions related to antipsychotic prescribing (i.e., experiences regarding delivery of patient care), knowledge and frequency of antipsychotic use, knowledge surrounding antipsychotic guideline recommendations, and strategies (i.e., interventions addressing current antipsychotic prescribing practices) for antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing. Consensus was defined as a median score of 1-3 or 7-9. During round 3, participants ranked statements on antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing strategies that achieved consensus (median score 7-9) using a weighted ranking scale (0-100 points) to determine priority.SettingOnline surveys distributed across Canada.SubjectsFifty-seven stakeholders (physicians, nurses, pharmacists) who work with ICU patients.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsParticipants prioritized six consensus statements on strategies for consideration when developing and implementing interventions to guide antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing. Statements focused on limiting antipsychotic prescribing to patients: 1) with hyperactive delirium, 2) at risk to themselves, their family, and/or staff due to agitation, and 3) whose care and treatment are being impacted due to agitation or delirium, and prioritizing 4) communication among staff about antipsychotic effectiveness, 5) direct and efficient communication tools on antipsychotic deprescribing at transitions of care, and 6) medication reconciliation at transitions of care.ConclusionsWe engaged diverse stakeholders to generate evidence-informed consensus statements regarding antipsychotic prescribing perceptions and practices that can be used to implement interventions to promote antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing strategies for ICU patients with and following critical illness.

Project description:ImportanceDespite guidelines recommending against prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in elderly men with limited life expectancy, PSA screening remains common.ObjectiveTo identify clinician characteristics associated with PSA screening rates in older veterans stratified by life expectancy.Design, setting, and participantsCross-sectional study of 826 286 veterans 65 years or older eligible for PSA screening who had VA laboratory tests performed in 2011 in the VA health care system.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the percentage of men with a screening PSA test in 2011. Limited life expectancy was defined as age of at least 85 years with Charlson comorbidity score of 1 or greater or age of at least 65 years with Charlson comorbidity score of 4 or greater. Primary predictors were clinician characteristics including degree-training level, specialty, age, and sex. We performed log-linear Poisson regression models for the association between each clinician characteristic and PSA screening stratified by patient life expectancy and adjusted for patient demographics and clinician clustering.ResultsIn 2011, 466 017 (56%) of older veterans received PSA screening, including 39% of the 203 717 men with limited life expectancy. After adjusting for patient demographics, higher PSA screening rates in patients with limited life expectancy was associated with having a clinician who was an older man and was no longer in training. The PSA screening rates ranged from 27% for men with a physician trainee to 42% for men with an attending physician (P < .001); 22% for men with a geriatrician to 82% for men with a urologist as their clinician (P < .001); 29% for men with a clinician 35 years or younger to 41% for those with a clinician 56 years or older (P < .001); and 38% for men with a female clinician older than 55 years vs 43% for men with a male clinician older than 55 years (P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceMore than one-third of men with limited life expectancy received PSA screening. Men whose clinician was a physician trainee had substantially lower PSA screening rates than those with an attending physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant. Interventions to reduce PSA screening rates in older men with limited life expectancy should be designed and targeted to high-screening clinicians- older male, nontrainee clinicians-for greatest impact.