8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Drug Prescription in Older Swiss Men and Women Followed in Family Medicine

      brief-report

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          We sought to estimate the prevalence of polypharmacy, the most prevalent drug classes involved, and the prevalence and type of potentially inappropriate prescribing among older male and female patients in family medicine.

          Methods

          We conducted a secondary analysis of baseline data from a pragmatic cluster-randomised trial on the efficacy of a screening and management tool for geriatric syndromes among older community-dwelling patients (aged ≥ 75 years) included by 42 family physicians. Information on drug prescription and clinical diagnoses (International Classification of Primary Care—2nd Edition [ICPC-2] coded) were extracted manually from medical records. The prevalence of polypharmacy, defined as the use of at least five permanent oral or parenteral drugs, and of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), identified according to 2015 updated Beers criteria, were compared between men and women.

          Results

          We included 429 patients (269 women and 160 men; mean age 82.9 and 81.8 years, respectively). Polypharmacy was found in 59.9% of them. Analgesics, antithrombotic agents and agents acting on the renin-angiotensin system were the most frequently prescribed drug categories. Three-quarters of patients (76.7%) were prescribed at least one PIM according to Beers criteria, without difference by sex/gender ( p = 0.760). The most frequent PIMs were proton-pump inhibitors used for > 8 weeks, diuretics, benzodiazepines, aspirin for primary prevention, and chronic use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Prescription patterns markedly differed by sex/gender, but the number and patterns of inappropriate prescriptions were comparable overall.

          Interpretation

          Both polypharmacy and PIMs were very common in older patients followed regularly in family medicine in Switzerland. Interestingly, most PIMs involved only a limited number of medication classes.

          Trial registration

          Clinicaltrials.gov NCT 02618291.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (10.1007/s40801-019-00175-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          STOPP/START criteria for potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people: version 2

          Purpose: screening tool of older people's prescriptions (STOPP) and screening tool to alert to right treatment (START) criteria were first published in 2008. Due to an expanding therapeutics evidence base, updating of the criteria was required. Methods: we reviewed the 2008 STOPP/START criteria to add new evidence-based criteria and remove any obsolete criteria. A thorough literature review was performed to reassess the evidence base of the 2008 criteria and the proposed new criteria. Nineteen experts from 13 European countries reviewed a new draft of STOPP & START criteria including proposed new criteria. These experts were also asked to propose additional criteria they considered important to include in the revised STOPP & START criteria and to highlight any criteria from the 2008 list they considered less important or lacking an evidence base. The revised list of criteria was then validated using the Delphi consensus methodology. Results: the expert panel agreed a final list of 114 criteria after two Delphi validation rounds, i.e. 80 STOPP criteria and 34 START criteria. This represents an overall 31% increase in STOPP/START criteria compared with version 1. Several new STOPP categories were created in version 2, namely antiplatelet/anticoagulant drugs, drugs affecting, or affected by, renal function and drugs that increase anticholinergic burden; new START categories include urogenital system drugs, analgesics and vaccines. Conclusion: STOPP/START version 2 criteria have been expanded and updated for the purpose of minimizing inappropriate prescribing in older people. These criteria are based on an up-to-date literature review and consensus validation among a European panel of experts.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Potentially inappropriate medications in the elderly: the PRISCUS list.

            Certain drugs are classified as potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) for the elderly because they carry an increased risk of adverse drug events in this patient group. PIM lists from other countries are of limited usefulness in Germany because different drugs are on the market in each country and prescribing practices vary as well. Thus, a list of potentially inappropriate medications for the elderly was developed specifically for use in Germany. A preliminary PIM list suitable for the German market was created on the basis of a selective literature search and a qualitative analysis of published international PIM lists. The final German PIM list was developed by means of a comprehensive, structured expert survey in two rounds (a so-called Delphi process). 83 drugs in a total of 18 drug classes were rated as potentially inappropriate for elderly patients. For 46 drugs, the experts came to no clear decision after the second Delphi round. For cases in which the administration of a PIM is clinically necessary, the final PRISCUS list contains recommendations for clinical practice, e.g. monitoring of laboratory values and dose adaptation. Therapeutic alternatives are also listed. Potentially inappropriate medications carry the risk of causing adverse drug events in the elderly. A drawback of using a Delphi process to generate a PIM list, as was done for the new German list, is that little scientific evidence is currently available for the evaluation of active substances, potential therapeutic alternatives, and indicated monitoring procedures. Thus, the validity and practicability of the PRISCUS list remain to be demonstrated (and the same holds for PIM lists already published in other countries). It should be used as a component of an overall concept for geriatric pharmacotherapy in which polypharmacy and interacting medications are avoided, and doses are regularly re-evaluated.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Gender in cardiovascular diseases: impact on clinical manifestations, management, and outcomes.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Yolanda.mueller@unisante.ch
                Journal
                Drugs Real World Outcomes
                Drugs Real World Outcomes
                Drugs - Real World Outcomes
                Springer International Publishing (Cham )
                2199-1154
                2198-9788
                17 December 2019
                17 December 2019
                March 2020
                : 7
                : 1
                : 87-95
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.9851.5, ISNI 0000 0001 2165 4204, University of Lausanne, ; Lausanne, Switzerland
                [2 ]GRID grid.9851.5, ISNI 0000 0001 2165 4204, Department of Family Medicine/Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), , University of Lausanne, ; Lausanne, Switzerland
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9986-3249
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2249-1245
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0992-3165
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8861-4538
                Article
                175
                10.1007/s40801-019-00175-6
                7060976
                31845213
                a7323df9-bf2f-4e9a-ac43-e5c760096c3f
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001711, Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung;
                Award ID: 32003B_159863/1
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Short Communication
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content59

                Cited by3

                Most referenced authors312