UNASSIGNED: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is commonly encountered in older adults; yet, there is limited information on the occurrence of PIP among older adults with hypertension. This study aims to determine and compare the prevalence of PIP and its association with comorbidities in older adult outpatients with hypertension across hospitals and community health centers (CHCs).
UNASSIGNED: This 3-year (2015-2017) repeated cross-sectional study used electronic medical records from Shenzhen, China, involving 62 hospitals and 678 primary medical institutions. PIP was defined using the 2019 Beers Criteria. Older adults (≥65 years) with hypertension and at least one outpatient prescription were included. Modified Poisson regression analysis was used to assess the association between chronic comorbidities, healthcare settings, and PIP.
UNASSIGNED: The prevalence of PIP in old adult outpatients with hypertension in 2015, 2016, and 2017 was 46.32%, 46.98%, and 46.58% in hospitals, with a sample size of 38,411, 46,235, and 50,495, respectively, and 29.14%, 26.66%, and 29.84% in CHCs, with a sample size of 26,876, 29,434, and 34,775 respectively. The top four most popular PIP in hospitals and CHCs was proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs), diuretics, benzodiazepines, and non-cyclooxygenase-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), respectively. PIP was most associated with chronic gastrointestinal disease (adjusted prevalence ratio = 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.50-1.59) and mental and behavioral disorders (adjusted prevalence ratio = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.46-1.53) in hospitals and with mental and behavioral disorders (adjusted prevalence ratio = 1.99; 95% CI = 1.95-2.03) and musculoskeletal system and connective tissue disorders (adjusted prevalence ratio = 1.33; 95% CI = 1.31-1.36) in CHCs. The prevalence of PIP was significantly higher in hospital settings than in CHCs (adjusted prevalence ratio = 1.65; 95% CI = 1.63-1.66).
UNASSIGNED: Among older adult outpatients with hypertension in Shenzhen, PIP was more prevalent in hospitals than in CHCs. The comorbidities most strongly associated with PIP were chronic gastrointestinal disease and mental and behavioral disorders in hospitals and mental and behavioral disorders in CHCs. Clinical pharmacy integration needs to be considered to reduce inappropriate prescribing in this vulnerable population.

Purpose: Effective antimicrobial use enhances care quality and combats antibiotic resistance. Yet, non-guideline factors influence potentially inappropriate prescribing. This study explores psycho-socio-organisational factors in antimicrobial prescribing as perceived by physicians across primary, secondary, and tertiary care. Methods: Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted using PubMed and Scopus databases from 1 January 2000, to 8 March 2023, with an update search until 30 January 2024. Inclusion criteria focused on studies in Europe exploring psycho-socio-organisational factors for antibiotic prescribing from physicians\' perspectives in hospital, inpatient, or primary care settings. Exclusion criteria targeted out-of-office prescriptions or low-quality studies. To evaluate the latter, several quality and risk-of-bias checklists were used. Data were extracted on study characteristics, study design, and methods and identified determinants of antibiotic prescribing. Data was analysed using a narrative synthesis method. Results: Among 8370 articles, 58 met inclusion criteria, yielding 35 articles from 23 countries. Three main themes emerged: personal, psychological, and organisational factors, encompassing seven determinants including work experience, knowledge, guideline adherence, uncertainty management, perceived pressure, time constraints, and diagnostic resource availability. Uncertainty management was key, with work experience and knowledge mitigating it. No additional factors emerged in the updated search. Conclusion: Enhanced uncertainty management decreases perceived patient and/or parental pressure to prescribe antibiotics, contributing to reducing potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP). Therefore, it is imperative to educate physicians on effectively managing uncertainty. Interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing should be tailored to the specific needs and preferences of the different prescribing physicians.

BACKGROUND: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) refers to the prescription of medications that carry a higher risk of adverse outcomes, such as drug interactions, falls, and cognitive impairment. PIP is of particular concern in older adults, and is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. Socioeconomic deprivation has been identified as a potential risk factor for PIP. However, the extent of this relationship remains unclear. This review aimed to synthesize the current literature on the association between PIP and socioeconomic status (SES) in older adults.
METHODS: A literature search was conducted using the databases Medline, Embase and CINAHL. A search strategy was developed to capture papers examining three key concepts: PIP, socioeconomic deprivation and older/elderly populations. Peer-reviewed quantitative research published between 1/1/2000 and 31/12/2022 was eligible for inclusion.
RESULTS: Twenty articles from 3,966 hits met the inclusion criteria. The sample size of included studies ranged from 668 to 16.5million individuals, with the majority from Europe (n = 8) and North America (n = 8). Most defined older patients as being 65 or over (n = 12) and used income (n = 7) or subsidy eligibility (n = 5) to assess SES. In all, twelve studies reported a statistically significant association between socioeconomic deprivation and an increased likelihood of experiencing PIP. Several of these reported some association after adjusting for number of drugs taken, or the presence of polypharmacy. The underlying reasons for the association are unclear, although one study found that the association between deprivation and higher PIP prevalence could not be explained by poorer access to healthcare facilities or practitioners.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest some association between an older person\'s SES and their likelihood of being exposed to PIP. SES appears to be one of several factors that act independently and in concert to influence an older person\'s likelihood of experiencing PIP. This review highlights that prioritising older people living in socioeconomically-deprived circumstances may be an efficient strategy when carrying out medication reviews.

OBJECTIVE: In 2019, a regional survey of potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIP) of psychotropic drugs in elderly psychiatric inpatients was carried out highlighting their inappropriate use in this population. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical relevance - defined as the provision of an appropriate and necessary treatment, chosen from other alternatives as being the most likely to produce the expected results for a given patient - of these prescriptions considered inappropriate according to current established criteria.
METHODS: Patients aged over 75, or 64 to 75 and polypathological with at least one PIP of psychotropic drugs or drugs with a high anticholinergic burden, identified by an audit grid established on the basis of STOPP/STARTv2 criteria and the Laroche list on the prescription at 48h of hospitalization, were included. The weighing of the inappropriateness nature of the prescription (resistance to treatment, period of crisis, comorbidities…) was established by a pharmacist-psychiatrist pair on the entire computerized record of the current episode. The clinical relevance of the PIP and the overall prescription was rated as 0 (irrelevant), 1 (partially relevant) or 2 (relevant).
RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were included. One hundred and twenty-five PIP of psychotropic drugs were noted: 50.4% concerned benzodiazepines and non-benzodiazepines anxiolytics (BZD/Z), 25.6% neuroleptics (NL), 12% antidepressants (ATD) and 12% drugs with a high anticholinergic burden. On one hand, 49.2% of PIP of BZD/Z, 50% of PIP of NL and 20% of PIP of ATD were considered irrelevant. On the other hand, 49.2% of PIP of BZD/Z, 31.3% of PIP of NL and 13.3% of PIP of ATD were considered partially relevant. Furthermore, 1.6% of PIP of BZD/Z, 18.8% of PIP of NL and 66.7% of PIP of ATD were considered relevant. For PIPs of drugs with a high anticholinergic burden, 80% were deemed irrelevant, 13.3% partially relevant and 6.7% relevant. In all, of the 34 drug prescriptions studied, three (8.8%) were considered irrelevant, 11 (32.4%) partially relevant and 20 (58.8%) clinically relevant.
CONCLUSIONS: This study highlighted the clinical relevance of more than half the prescriptions considered inappropriate according to current PPI criteria in the elderly. It underlines the interest of a new PPI detection tool for elderly patients with psychiatric disorders.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the prevalence of potentially inappropriately prescribed drugs in hemodialysis patients and patients with chronic kidney disease who did not require renal replacement therapy, as well as to identify risk factors associated with potentially inappropriate prescribing.
METHODS: The study was designed as a cross-sectional study conducted at the Department of Nephrology, Clinical Center in Nis, Serbia. The patients were divided into two groups: (1) patients on hemodialysis treatment and (2) patients with various degrees of chronic kidney disease without renal replacement therapy. The presence or absence of potentially inappropriate prescribing was determined using the 2015 AGS Beers criteria.
RESULTS: The study included a total of 218 patients aged 65 years and over. The number of patients with potentially inappropriate prescribed drugs did not differ significantly (chi-square = 0.000, p = 1.000) between patients on hemodialysis (27 of 83, i.e., 32.5%) and patients with various degrees of chronic kidney disease without renal replacement therapy (44 of 135, i.e., 32.6%). Factors associated with potentially inappropriate prescribing in hemodialysis patients were the number of drugs (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.919, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.325-2.780) and number of comorbidities (HR = 1.743, 95% CI: 1.109-2.740). The number of drugs (HR = 1.438, 95% CI: 1.191-1.736) was the only independent factor associated with increased risk of potentially inappropriate prescribing in patients without renal replacement therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that potentially inappropriate prescribing is a relatively frequent phenomenon present in about a third of patients in both study groups. The number of prescribed drugs was the main factor associated with the increased risk of potentially inappropriate prescribing in both groups.

BACKGROUND: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is usually associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes. It is therefore important to identify PIP in older adults. However, there are no clear prioritisation strategies to select patients requiring prescription reviews.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the association between the identification of seniors at risk (ISAR) score and the number of PIPs.
METHODS: A 12-month retrospective hospital-based study was conducted. PIPs, including potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs), were detected using the STOPP/START tool. Multivariate linear regressions were conducted to identify factors associated with the number of PIPs. Sensitivity, specificity, Youden index, and ROC curve were calculated to determine the predictive power of ISAR score.
RESULTS: This study included 266 records. The analysis led to the detection of 420 PIMs and 210 PPOs, with a prevalence of 80.1% and 54.9%, respectively. Multivariate linear regression revealed that the ISAR score (p = 0.041), and the number of medications (p < 0.001) were determinants of PIP. The number of medications remained the sole determinant of the number of PIMs (p < 0.001), while living in a nursing home was the only determinant of the number of PPOs (p = 0.036).
CONCLUSIONS: The study showed that the ISAR score and the number of medications were independently associated with the number of PIPs. Considering the use of the ISAR score and the number of medications may be useful strategies to prioritise patients for whom prescribing appropriateness should be assessed using explicit criteria.

BACKGROUND: Medication utilization has been increasing in the U.S. year-over-year for several decades. As older adults take more medications, there is a higher risk of them being exposed to drug-drug or drug-disease interactions. The American Geriatrics Society in 2019 updated their Beers Criteria for Potentially Inappropriate Medication (PIM) Use in Older Adults. The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of utilization of medications included in the 2019 Beers Criteria.
METHODS: An analysis was conducted using the Medicare Part D Provider Utilization and Payment Data Public Use File for calendar-year 2020. Medications identified in the 2019 Beers Criteria were applied to the analysis. Two categories of medications were assessed: (1) \"Avoid\" and (2) \"Use With Caution.\"
RESULTS: In 2020, 56 million prescriptions were dispensed to Medicare patients 65 years and older that are recommended to be avoided without exception (4.7% of all prescriptions) totaling $957 million in medication costs. The most utilized medication classes in this category were benzodiazepines (25,949,994 prescriptions), \"Z-drugs\" (6,204,909 prescriptions), long-acting sulfonylureas (5,306,577 prescriptions), 1st-generation antihistamines (5,049,289 prescriptions), and tricyclic antidepressants (4,190,062 prescriptions). Additionally, 135 million prescriptions were dispensed to Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older for medications which the Beers Criteria states to use caution (11.3% of all prescriptions) exceeding $2.85 billion in medication costs. The most utilized medications for this category were diuretics (74,599,126 prescriptions), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (30,033,121 prescriptions), serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (11,858,968 prescriptions), tramadol (11,450,878 prescriptions), and mirtazapine (5,737,304 prescriptions).
CONCLUSIONS: Even with the existence of the AGS Beers Criteria for PIM Use in Older Adults and its continued updated versions, 16% of medications dispensed to Medicare Part D were potentially inappropriate. Future studies are needed to assess if this has led to worsened outcomes among older adults who utilized these PIM.

BACKGROUND: Potentially inappropriate prescribing is common among older adults with multimorbidity due to various reasons, from concurrent application of multiple single-disease clinical guidelines to fragmentation of care. Interventions such as medication review have been implemented worldwide to reduce inappropriate prescribing for older adults. However, the implementability of such interventions are underexplored in the outpatient clinics in Singapore\'s public hospitals. Hence, the Pro-M study aims to assess the feasibility of implementing a physician-pharmacist collaborative care intervention in geriatric medicine outpatient clinics to facilitate appropriate prescribing for older adults in Singapore.
METHODS: This is a single-arm, non-randomised feasibility study using a pre-post evaluation design. This study consists of two parts: (1) implementation phase of the intervention (6 months) and an (2) evaluation phase (3 months). Eligible patients will be recruited from geriatric medicine outpatient clinics at two public hospitals in Singapore through convenience sampling. The main components of the Pro-M intervention are: (1) pharmacist-facilitated medication reviews with feedback on any medication issues and potential recommendations to physicians, and (2) physicians communicating changes to other relevant prescribers. The evaluation phase will involve surveying and interviewing physicians and pharmacists involved in the implementation of the intervention. A mixed-method approach will be employed for data collection and analysis. The quantitative and qualitative findings will be triangulated and reported using Proctor\'s implementation outcomes: appropriateness, penetration, acceptability, fidelity, feasibility, and sustainability. A basic cost analysis will be conducted alongside the study.
CONCLUSIONS: This is a phase 2 study to test the feasibility of implementing an intervention that was co-created with stakeholders during phase 1 development of an intervention to optimise prescribing for older adults with multimorbidity. The implementation will be assessed using Proctor\'s implementation outcomes to provide insights on the process and the feasibility of implementing medication reviews for older adults with multimorbidity as a routine practice in outpatient clinics. Data collected from this study will inform a subsequent scale-up study.
BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05756478. Registered on 06 March 2023.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) and their association with ADR-related hospital admissions in patients aged ≥ 65 years admitted acutely to the hospital.
METHODS: Information on medications and morbidities was extracted from the Adverse Drug Reactions in an Ageing Population (ADAPT) cohort (N = 798: N = 361 ADR-related admissions; 437 non-ADR-related admissions). PIP and PPOs were assessed using Beers Criteria 2019 and STOPP/START version 2. Multivariable logistic regression (adjusted odds ratios (aOR), 95%CI) was used to examine the association between PIP, PPOs and ADR-related admissions, adjusting for covariates (age, gender, comorbidity, polypharmacy).
RESULTS: In total, 715 (90%; 95% CI 87-92%) patients had ≥1 Beers Criteria, 555 (70%; 95% CI 66-73%) had ≥ 1 STOPP criteria and 666 patients (83%; 95% CI 81-86%) had ≥ 1 START criteria. Being prescribed at least one Beers (aOR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.00-2.77), or meeting STOPP (aOR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.79-1.45) or START (aOR = 0.72; 95%CI = 0.50-1.06) criteria or the number of PIP/PPO criteria met was not significantly associated with ADR-related admissions. Patients prescribed certain drug classes (e.g., antiplatelet agents, diuretics) per individual PIP criteria were more likely to have an ADR-related admission.
CONCLUSIONS: There was a high prevalence of PIP and PPOs in this cohort but no association with ADR-related admissions.

OBJECTIVE: Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) are growing concerns in the ageing population. They carry the risk of increasing adverse effects, medical interactions, and difficulties managing the medication. Few studies in Portugal evaluate the prevalence of polypharmacy and PIP in primary care. No previous studies in the primary care setting in Portugal have been conducted using the European Union (EU)(7)-PIM (potentially inappropriate medication) list tool. In this study, we aimed to estimate the prevalence of polypharmacy and PIP in two family health units in Portugal.  Methods: To answer this question, we enrolled a sample of 361 elderly patients from two family health units in a descriptive observational transversal study. We randomly selected patients, consulted their prescription records in the previous 12 months, and applied the EU(7)-PIM list tool, validated for the Portuguese population. The data was then analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics and the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, IBM Corp., Version 24.0, Armonk, NY).
RESULTS: Our results showed a prevalence of 79.8% of polypharmacy in the elderly population and 73.4% of PIP. These values are higher than predicted in the literature, but different screening tools have been used among papers. The mean number of prescribed drugs per patient was nine in one unit and seven in the other, and the mode was eleven per patient. The most identified PIP-associated drugs were proton pump inhibitors in 46.4% of the patients in one unit and 43.7% in the other. We also found a statistically significant higher prevalence of PIP and polypharmacy in females and patients over 75 years.
CONCLUSIONS: From a prevalence perspective, we found higher-than-expected prevalences of PIP and polypharmacy in our population. Contributing factors might be a higher ageing index in the Portuguese population, modern practices using combination therapy, and the use of a screening tool that does not take into account the personal clinical history of patients. Further limitations involve only including patients with follow-up in the units studied. Even so, it suggests both PIP and polypharmacy as concerns to address, and we will strive to educate both health teams on PIP, polypharmacy, and deprescribing. We also emphasize the need to widen the study to other family health units.