OBJECTIVE: To adapt the 2015 Screening Tool of Older Persons\' Prescriptions (STOPP)/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START) criteria to older nursing home patients with a limited life expectancy of 1.5 to 2 years.
METHODS: A modified Delphi consensus study.
METHODS: The study was established in The Netherlands and conducted online. The international panel consisted of 23 experts with experience in medicine for older people.
METHODS: The expert panel was presented with the 2015 STOPP/START criteria using an online survey program (Survey Monkey). The panelists were asked for their opinion on the appropriateness of the STOPP and START criteria, and adaptations to these criteria for older nursing home patients with a limited life expectancy on 4-point Likert scales. Consensus was defined as ≥70% of the panelists answering (very) inappropriate or (very) appropriate, and (completely) disagree or (completely) agree.
RESULTS: Twenty-one panelists completed all 3 Delphi rounds. The final list of \"Represcribing for Nursing home residents With A Limited life expectancy (ReNeWAL)\" criteria comprises 132 criteria: 98 criteria to stop (70 original STOPP criteria and 28 adapted) and 34 criteria to start (16 original START criteria and 18 adapted) for older nursing home patients with a limited life expectancy. Considerations that panelists mentioned for adapting criteria were mainly prevention and treatment of discomfort.
CONCLUSIONS: It is clear that represcribing for older nursing home patients is highly complex and requires the consideration of various elements. The ReNeWAL criteria may be useful in enhancing represcribing for older nursing home patients with a limited life expectancy.

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.

UNASSIGNED: STOPP/START criteria for potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs, STOPP) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs, START) have gained considerable interest and traction since they were first published in 2008. This review focuses on their uptake and impact in various clinical settings.
UNASSIGNED: STOPP/START criteria, now in their third iteration, are explicit criteria designed to facilitate detection of common and clinically important PIMs and PPOs during routine medication review in any clinical setting. We examine the influence of the criteria, particularly in clinical trials that focused on their impact on clinically relevant endpoints.
UNASSIGNED: STOPP/START criteria are widely used in several countries within Europe and beyond for medication review and audit. As a discreet intervention, the criteria have been tested in several single-center and two large-scale multi-center clinical trials. The single-center trials indicate that STOPP/START criteria reduce polypharmacy, inappropriate prescribing, ADRs (adverse drug reactions), medication cost and falls. In contrast, the SENATOR and OPERAM multicentre trials did not demonstrate significant reduction in ADRs, all-cause mortality, drug-related hospital readmissions, nor any improvement in quality-of-life. Further clinical trials are required to examine whether STOPP/START criteria as an intervention can deliver significant clinical benefit in a reproducible manner in various clinical settings.

In order to implement the principles of providing clinically and economically effective care, the current state of healthcare must be evaluated, and challenges must be addressed. As part of a physician\'s role in such a context, one tool consists of identifying medication-related problems (MRPs) and accordingly implementing best practices and innovative strategies to improve patient healthcare outcomes. The geriatric population is expected to have passed through the natural ageing process and experienced several physiological and biological changes that impact their bodies and lives. In the presence of geriatric syndromes and the increased number of medications consumed, the risk of MRPs such as polypharmacy, potentially inappropriate medication (PIM), adverse events, drug-drug interactions, and risk of non-adherence increases. Different interventions that focus on practical and perceptual barriers have been studied, and different tools to define clinically important prescribing problems relating to PIM have been established. The Beers Criteria and STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons\' Prescriptions)/START (Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment) criteria are the most widely used sets of explicit PIM criteria; however, they are still limited in Saudi Arabia. These tools should be considered in clinical settings to improve healthcare outcomes in the geriatric population, and the clinical relevance of enhancing medication should also be explored from the point of view of both the patient and healthcare practitioners.

The STOPP/START criteria are explicit physiologic systems-based criteria that summarize evidence on clinically relevant prescribing problems related to the use of potentially inappropriate medications (STOPP criteria) and potential prescribing omissions (START criteria). The two previous versions of the STOPP/START criteria were published in 2008 and 2015, and their Spanish versions in 2009 and 2015. Version3 of these criteria has just been published in 2023. The aim of this article is to present the Spanish translated version, and to review the use and impact that version2 of 2015 has had in our language. A translation from English to Spanish was performed by expert professionals with a high level of English of version3 of the STOPP/START criteria, which incorporates the evidence published from April 2014 to March 2022. In addition, a systematic review of publications that have used the Spanish translation of the previous version (version2 of 2015) of the STOPP/START criteria was performed. The new version, presented in this article, has 190 STOPP/START criteria (133 STOPP criteria and 57 START criteria), which is a 40% increase in the number of criteria compared to the previous version. The review found 37 studies (21 observational, 11 interventional and 5 other) that used the Spanish version instead of the international version. The Spanish version 3 of the STOPP/START criteria is an updated explicit list of potentially inappropriate medications and possible omissions in prescribing that aims to optimize medication and minimize adverse drug reactions during medication review in the elderly, particularly those with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. With this new version, the original criteria are intended to be more widely disseminated within the Spanish-speaking healthcare community. The Spanish version2 of the STOPP/START has been widely used, so we consider that the translation into Spanish has helped to improve pharmacotherapy in older patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity in our linguistic environment.

STOPP/START is a physiological systems-based explicit set of criteria that attempts to define the clinically important prescribing problems relating to potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs-STOPP criteria) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs-START criteria). The previous two versions of STOPP/START criteria were published in 2008 and 2015. The present study describes the revised and updated third version of the criteria.
A detailed system-by-system review of the published literature from April 2014 to March 2022 was undertaken with the aim of including clinically important new explicit PIM and PPO criteria and removing any criteria considered to be no longer correct or outdated. A panel of 11 academic physicians with recognized expertise in geriatric pharmacotherapy from 8 European countries participated in a Delphi panel with the task of validating the draft criteria. The panel was presented with the draft new criteria using the SurveyMonkey® on-line platform in which panelists were asked to indicate their level of agreement on a five-point Likert scale.
Two hundred and four evidence-based draft criteria (one hundred and forty-five STOPP criteria, fifty-nine START criteria) were presented to panelists for assessment using the Delphi validation method. Over the course of four rounds of Delphi validation, the panel achieved consensus on 133 STOPP criteria and 57 START criteria, i.e., 190 STOPP/START criteria in total representing a 66.7% increase in the number of criteria compared to STOPP/START version 2 published in 2015.
A fully revised and updated version of STOPP/START criteria has been validated by a European expert panel using the Delphi consensus process.

Atrial Fibrillation (AF) is common in the elderly. A key component of AF management is Oral Anticoagulant Therapy (OAT), consisting of Vitamin K Antagonists (VKAs) or Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs). The aim of the present study is to check, using STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons\' Prescriptions)/START (Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment) Criteria, if such drugs are potentially inappropriately prescribed/omitted in an elderly population with AF, and to determine their impact on mortality.
This study included patients (n = 427) with nonvalvular AF consecutively evaluated between 2013 and 2019 at the Geriatric Outpatient Service, University Hospital of Monserrato, Cagliari, Italy, and followed up for 36 months. The OAT group included 330 patients; the other 97 patients constituted the non-OAT group. The sample was assessed for STOPP/START criteria.
We found no difference (p > 0.1) in comorbidity burden, frailty, and cardio-cerebro-vascular disease prevalence in the two groups, which also did not present a difference in 36-month mortality (p = 0.97). OAT was overall appropriately taken, and 62.4% of OAT-group presented the START criterion to take antiplatelets but also the STOPP criterion not to take them, because of the simultaneous anticoagulant intake. In the non-OAT group, 69.1% presented the START criterion to take anticoagulants, and 21.6% the START criterion to take antiplatelets.
Patients with AF are often prone to under or over-prescription, particularly of antithrombotic drugs. The STOPP/START criteria are a valid tool to assess and correct wrong therapeutic choices. In frail and comorbid subjects, survival is not correlated with the assumption of OAT.

This study aims to evaluate the use of STOPP/START criteria in the identification of Potentially inappropriate medication and potential prescribing omissions in older patients with cardiovascular diseases in Bulgaria. Excessive morbidity and mortality has been linked to drug-related problems and increased use of healthcare services and is an understudied problem for Bulgaria.
A prospective, questionnaire-based study was conducted among 543 older patients across 25 pharmacies in Bulgaria. Socio-demographic characteristic, disease profile, symptoms, and medication data were collected. The questionnaire was developed for the purposes of the EUROAGEISM project. Out of all 543 patients, only those with documented cardio-vascular diseases were extracted and the medication profile per patient was evaluated for Potentially inappropriate medication (PIMs) and potentially prescribing omissions (PPOs) using STOPP/START criteria version 2. In addition, several risks for potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIPs), PPOs and PIMs were calculated with the focus being on the Odds and Risks to develop a PIP.
Four hundred and twenty eight from 531 patients with known therapy for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) were included in the analysis of PIP (40.52% aged 65-69 years, 61.88% female, 64% had up to 6 comorbidities, and 21.72% presenting with polypharmacy). A total of 71 PIMs in 64 patients with polypharmacy were identified during applying STOPP criteria. 56% of patients taking above five medicines daily had PIMs. The majority of PIMs (31%) were related to CVDs treatment, followed by PIMs in the treatment of endocrine diseases (22.54%), duplication of medicines (8.46%) and prolonged treatment with benzodiazepines (8.46%). Forty four PPOs were identified with START criteria. 22.72% were related to lack of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) in the presence of gastroesophageal disorders, and the same percentage was for lack of Calcium-vitamin D supplementation in osteoporosis. Applying the methodology of risks calculation the sample risk for PPO was 2.1% and for PIM 3.4%. At sample level the relative risk for PPO was 62% out of the risk for PIM and at population level varied between 42.8 and 89.8% and it is statistically significant. The number needed to treat for the event to happen is 77.5, meaning that at every 78 prescriptions there is a chance to appear PIP.
Application of methodologies for detection of potentially inappropriate prescribing is not part of routine clinical practice in Bulgaria. Our study demonstrates a high percentage of potentially inappropriate medication among older patients with polypharmacy. Along with the aging population in Bulgaria, economic burden of polypharmacy and the prevalence of cardiovascular diseases, it is especially important to address potentially inappropriate medication use in cardiovascular patients. There is a considerable necessity for implementation of measures for early detection of potentially inappropriate medication and potentially prescribing omission as a part of de-prescribing strategies in older patients.

UNASSIGNED: Elderly patients suffer from chronic diseases and are prone to polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP). This study aimed to identify potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) among elderly patients in a tertiary care hospital setting and to estimate the prevalence of polypharmacy.
UNASSIGNED: This multicenter retrospective observational study reviewed patient data from two major Palestinian hospitals. The collected data included patient demographics, comorbidities, and medications administered during hospitalization and discharge. The study included 247 patients aged ≥ 65 years hospitalized between January 2019 and December 2019. The STOPP/START criteria version 2 was used to identify the prevalence of PIMs and PPOs. Clinical pharmacists verified the data, and SPSS was used for data analysis. Descriptive statistics, one-tailed bivariate correlations, and Pearson\'s test were applied to the variables of interest to examine their association with the STOPP/START criteria.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 247 patients were included in the study, and 50.2% were females. As a result, 165 (66.8%) participants were identified with PIPs, including 30 patients with PPOs, 91 with PIMs, and 44 with both. Furthermore, the prevalence of PIP during hospitalization and discharge was 56.29% and 64.39%, respectively. Polypharmacy (5-9 medications) was 44.5% and 52.1% during hospitalization and discharge, respectively, and excessive polypharmacy (ten medications or more) was 33.6% and 16.4% during hospitalization and discharge, respectively. Moreover, 47.3% of the patients had a comorbidity index of ≥ 5.
UNASSIGNED: This study identified a high prevalence of PIPs among elderly patients during hospital admission and discharge. In addition, more than half of the geriatric patients in this study had PIP and a high prevalence of polypharmacy. Therefore, this study emphasizes the importance of adapting evidence-based tools, such as the STOPP/START criteria, to optimize patient medication therapy and guide prescribers in identifying and resolving PIMs and PPOs.

To evaluate the agreement of hospital physicians and older patients with individualised STOPP/START-based medication optimisation recommendations from a pharmacotherapy team.
This study was embedded within a large European, multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial examining the effect of a structured medication review on drug-related hospital admissions in multimorbid (≥ 3 chronic conditions) older people (≥ 70 years) with polypharmacy (≥ 5 chronic medications), called OPERAM. Data from the Dutch intervention arm of this trial were used for this study. Medication review was performed jointly by a physician and pharmacist (i.e. pharmacotherapy team) supported by a Clinical Decision Support System with integrated STOPP/START criteria. Individualised STOPP/START-based medication optimisation recommendations were discussed with patients and attending hospital physicians.
139 patients were included, mean (SD) age 78.3 (5.1) years, 47% male and median (IQR) number of medications at admission 11 (9-14). In total, 371 recommendations were discussed with patients and physicians, overall agreement was 61.6% for STOPP and 60.7% for START recommendations. Highest agreement was found for initiation of osteoporosis agents and discontinuation of proton pump inhibitors (both 74%). Factors associated with higher agreement in multivariate analysis were: female gender (+ 17.1% [3.7; 30.4]), ≥ 1 falls in the past year (+ 15.0% [1.5; 28.5]) and renal impairment i.e. eGFR 30-50 ml/min/1.73 m2; (+ 18.0% [2.0; 34.0]). The main reason for disagreement (40%) was patients\' reluctance to discontinue or initiate medication.
Better patient and physician education regarding the benefit/risk balance of pharmacotherapy, in addition to more precise and up-to-date medical records to avoid irrelevant recommendations, will likely result in higher adherence with future pharmacotherapy optimisation recommendations.
Trial Registration Number NCT02986425.