Dataset Information

GP-delivered medication review of polypharmacy, deprescribing, and patient priorities in older people with multimorbidity in Irish primary care (SPPiRE Study): A cluster randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is a rising prevalence of multimorbidity, particularly in older patients, and a need for evidence-based medicines management interventions for this population. The Supporting Prescribing in Older Adults with Multimorbidity in Irish Primary Care (SPPiRE) trial aimed to investigate the effect of a general practitioner (GP)-delivered, individualised medication review in reducing polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs) in community-dwelling older patients with multimorbidity in primary care.

Methods and findings

We conducted a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) set in 51 GP practices throughout the Republic of Ireland. A total of 404 patients, aged ≥65 years with complex multimorbidity, defined as being prescribed ≥15 regular medicines, were recruited from April 2017 and followed up until October 2020. Furthermore, 26 intervention GP practices received access to the SPPiRE website where they completed an educational module and used a template for an individualised patient medication review that identified PIP, opportunities for deprescribing, and patient priorities for care. A total of 25 control GP practices delivered usual care. An independent blinded pharmacist assessed primary outcome measures that were the number of medicines and the proportion of patients with any PIP (from a predefined list of 34 indicators based predominantly on the STOPP/START version 2 criteria). We performed an intention-to-treat analysis using multilevel modelling. Recruited participants had substantial disease and treatment burden at baseline with a mean of 17.37 (standard deviation [SD] 3.50) medicines. At 6-month follow-up, both intervention and control groups had reductions in the numbers of medicines with a small but significantly greater reduction in the intervention group (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.899 to 0.999, p = 0.045). There was no significant effect on the odds of having at least 1 PIP in the intervention versus control group (odds ratio [OR] 0.39, 95% CI: 0.140 to 1.064, p = 0.066). Adverse events recorded included mortality, emergency department (ED) presentations, and adverse drug withdrawal events (ADWEs), and there was no evidence of harm. Less than 2% of drug withdrawals in the intervention group led to a reported ADWE. Due to the inability to electronically extract data, primary outcomes were measured at just 2 time points, and this is the main limitation of this work.

Conclusions

The SPPiRE intervention resulted in a small but significant reduction in the number of medicines but no evidence of a clear effect on PIP. This reduction in significant polypharmacy may have more of an impact at a population rather than individual patient level.

Trial registration

ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN12752680.

SUBMITTER: McCarthy C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8730438 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMultimorbidity, polypharmacy, and potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) pose challenges for the care of people with cognitive impairment. The aim of the present study is to explore whether multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and PIM predict falls and hospital admissions in a sample of people with cognitive impairment in day-care centers in Germany.MethodsWe used data from the German day-care study (multicenter longitudinal study, n = 433). Multimorbidity was defined as ≥ 2 chronic diseases. Polypharmacy was defined as prescriptions to ≥ 5 drugs. Potentially inappropriate medication was defined as scoring on the PRISCUS list. Binary logistic regression analyses were computed to determine whether multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and potentially inappropriate medication at t0 predicted falls and hospital admissions as outcomes at t1 (six months later).ResultsThe rate of multimorbidity and polypharmacy was 87.8% and 60.3%, respectively. 15.9% of the people with cognitive impairment received PIM / PRISCUS-listed drugs, 43.6% ACB-listed drugs, and 52.7% CNS depressant drugs. Falls and hospital admissions during follow-up were prevalent in 19.4% and 24.7% of the people with cognitive impairment. Both were significantly predicted by the total number of drugs (falls: OR = 1.152, p = 0.001, overall model: p < 0.001; hospital admissions: OR = 1.103, p = 0.020, overall model: p = 0.001), even if regression analyses were controlled for the number of comorbidities.ConclusionsPolypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medication are highly prevalent in people with cognitive impairment in German day-care centers. The number of drugs and appropriateness of medication seem to be crucial for the risk of falls and hospital admissions. Polypharmacy and PIM should be critically reviewed by healthcare providers and avoided as much as and whenever possible.Trial registrationISRCTN16412551, 30 July 2014, registered partly retrospectively.

Project description:BackgroundMultimorbidity and polypharmacy are very common in older adults in primary care. Ideally, general practitioners (GPs), should regularly review medication lists to identify inappropriate medication(s) and, where appropriate, deprescribe. However, it remains challenging to deprescribe given time constraints and few recommendations from guidelines. Further, patient related barriers and enablers to deprescribing have to be accounted for. The aim of this study was to identify barriers and enablers to deprescribing as reported by older adults with polypharmacy and multimorbidity.MethodsWe conducted a survey among participants aged ≥70 years, with multimorbidity (≥3 chronic conditions) and polypharmacy (≥5 chronic medications). We invited Swiss GPs, to recruit eligible patients who then completed a paper-based survey on demographics, medications and chronic conditions. We used the revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire and added twelve additional Likert scale questions and two open-ended questions to assess barriers and enablers towards deprescribing, which we coded and categorized into meaningful themes.ResultSixty four Swiss GPs consented to recruit 5-6 patients each and returned 300 participant responses. Participants were 79.1 years (SD 5.7), 47% female, 34% lived alone, and 86% managed their medications themselves. Sixty-seven percent of participants took 5-9 regular medicines and 24% took ≥10 medicines. The majority of participants (77%) were willing to deprescribe one or more of their medicines if their doctor said it was possible. There was no association with sex, age or the number of medicines and willingness to deprescribe. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, there was a strong positive association between willingness to deprescribe and saying that because they have a good relationship with their GP, they would feel that deprescribing was safe OR 11.3 (95% CI: 4.64-27.3) and agreeing that they would be willing to deprescribe if new studies showed an avoidable risk OR 8.0 (95% CI 3.79-16.9). From the open questions, the most mentioned barriers towards deprescribing were patients feeling well on their current medicines and being convinced that they need all their medicines.ConclusionsMost older adults with polypharmacy are willing to deprescribe. GPs may be able to increase deprescribing by building trust with their patients and communicating evidence about the risks of medication use.

Project description:Background: Multimorbidity (the presence of two or more chronic conditions) is associated with poorer health outcomes, particularly for patients with significant polypharmacy (?15 medications), due to the higher risk of adverse events and drug interactions. The SPPiRE study will assess the effectiveness of a complex intervention to support general practitioners (GPs) to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing and consider deprescribing in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy. The aim of the SPPiRE process evaluation is to understand how and why the intervention is effective or ineffective and to explore the potential for system wide implementation of the intervention using the Medical Research Council general themes of context, implementation and mechanism of impact. Methods: The SPPiRE study is a clustered randomised controlled trial (RCT), aiming to recruit 55 general practices and 400 patients (?65 years) on ?15 medications throughout the Republic of Ireland. This mixed-methods process evaluation of the SPPiRE study will integrate both quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative data will be collected on use of the intervention elements and from GP questionnaires. Qualitative data will be collected from semi-structured telephone interviews with all intervention GPs and a purposeful sample of patients from intervention practices. The topic guide will explore barriers and facilitators to participation and implementation of the intervention. Quantitative data will be analysed using descriptive statistics. Interviews will be transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Quantitative and qualitative data will be then be integrated. Discussion: The SPPiRE cluster RCT will provide evidence regarding the effectiveness and practicability of delivering a structured medication review in reducing polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescribing for patients with multimorbidity. This process evaluation will provide information on how the intervention was implemented, how it was or was not effective and the potential for a system wide implementation. Trial registration: ISRCTN 12752680, registration: 20/10/2016.

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.

Project description:BackgroundOlder people with multimorbidity are often prescribed multiple medication treatments, leading to difficulties in self-managing their medications and negative experiences in medication use. The perceived burden arising from the process of undertaking medication self-management practices has been described as medication burden. Preliminary evidence has suggested that patients' demographic and clinical characteristics may impact their medication burden. Little is known regarding how psychosocial factors affect medication burden in older people with multimorbidity. The aim of this study was to identify psychosocial factors associated with medication burden among community-dwelling older people with multimorbidity.MethodsThis is a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional study. A total of 254 older people with three or more chronic conditions were included in the analysis. Participants were assessed for demographics, medication burden, psychosocial variables (depression, medication-related knowledge, beliefs, social support, self-efficacy, and satisfaction), disease burden, and polypharmacy. Medication burden was measured using items from the Treatment Burden Questionnaire. Univariate and multivariate linear regression models explored factors associated with medication burden.ResultsThe mean age of participants was 70.90 years. Participants had an average of 4.40 chronic conditions, and over one-third had polypharmacy. Multivariate analysis showed that the participants' satisfaction with medication treatments (β = -0.32, p < 0.001), disease burden (β = 0.25, p = 0.009), medication self-efficacy (β = -0.21, p < 0.001), polypharmacy (β = 0.15, p = 0.016), and depression (β = 0.14, p = 0.016) were independently associated with medication burden. Other factors, including demographic characteristics, medication knowledge, medication beliefs, medication social support, and the number or specific types of chronic conditions, were not independently associated with medication burden.ConclusionsPoor medication treatment satisfaction, great disease burden, low medication self-efficacy, polypharmacy, and depression may increase individuals' medication burden. Understanding psychosocial aspects associated with medication burden provides an important perspective for identifying older people who are overburdened by their medication treatments and offering individualised treatments to relieve their burden.

Project description:BackgroundTargeted deprescribing of anticholinergic and sedative medications in older people may improve their health outcomes. This trial will determine if pharmacist-led reviews lead to general practitioners deprescribing anticholinergic and sedative medications in older people living in the community.Methods and analysisThe standard protocol items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) checklist was used to develop and report the protocol. The trial will involve older adults stratified by frailty (low, medium, and high). This will be a pragmatic two-arm randomized controlled trial to test general practitioner uptake of pharmacist recommendations to deprescribe anticholinergic and sedative medications that are causing adverse side effects in patients.Study populationCommunity-dwelling frail adults, 65 years or older, living in the Canterbury region of New Zealand, seeking publicly funded home support services or admission to aged residential care and taking at least one anticholinergic or sedative medication regularly.InterventionNew Zealand registered pharmacists using peer-reviewed deprescribing guidelines will visit participants at home in the community, review their medications, and recommend anticholinergic and sedative medications that could be deprescribed to the participant's general practitioner. The total use of anticholinergic and sedative medications will be quantified using the Drug Burden Index (DBI).OutcomesThe primary outcome will be the change in total DBI between baseline and 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes will include entry into aged residential care, prolonged hospitalization, and death.Data collection pointsData will be collected at the time of interRAI assessments (T0), at the time of the baseline review (T1), at 6 months following the baseline review (T2), and at the end of the study period, or end of study participation for participants admitted into aged residential care, or who died (T3).Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been obtained from the Human, Disability and Ethics Committee: ethical number (17CEN265).Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ACTRN12618000729224 . Registered on May 2, 2018, with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry.