2016Unpublished venueRequires access

CP-002 Managing polypharmacy in geriatric patients – a comparison of different assessment tools used for medication reviews

Marietta Nagano, TP Egger, Karin Nemec

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Background Geriatric patients often suffer from multiple chronic diseases. Polypharmacy as well as age related physiological changes expose them to a high risk of drug related adverse events. Poor adherence and potentially inappropriate medicines (PIMs) are a further challenge for prescribers. Purpose When performing a medication review, it is important to not only check for overtreatment in order to reduce polypharmacy, but also to include a check for undertreatment and for inappropriate medication. Material and methods Widely recognised tools to assess the medication of geriatric patients are the STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons’ Prescriptions)/START (Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment) criteria, the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) and lists with PIMs. For this study, the medication lists of 50 geriatric patients (level of care ≥3) in a nursing home were analysed in detail using these three instruments. The medication review of each patient was repeated within 6 months to record the acceptance of the interventions. Results Overall, the pharmacist pointed to a possible drug related problem in 28% of all prescribed medicines, equivalent to three possible drug related problems per patient. Over 50% of the interventions suggested by the pharmacist were accepted and kept until the following review. Conclusion The type and number of drug related problems was strongly dependent on the assessment tool. This should be taken into account when introducing an assessment tool into daily routine. It is also important to note that the number of identified problems neither corresponds to the clinical significance of the problem nor to the quality of the medication before the review was performed. To put it bluntly, the mere number of interventions should not be seen as the main indicator of pharmaceutical care. Instead, more weight should be put on the clinical significance of these interventions. References and/or Acknowledgements Gallagher P, Ryan C, Byrne S, et al. STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons’ Prescriptions) and START (Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment). Consensus Validation. Int J Clin Pharm Ther 2008;46:72–83 No conflict of interest.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Background Geriatric patients often suffer from multiple chronic diseases. Polypharmacy as well as age related physiological changes expose them to a high risk of drug related adverse events. Poor adherence and potentially inappropriate medicines (PIMs) are a further challenge for prescribers. Purpose When performing a medication review, it is important to not only check for overtreatment in order to reduce polypharmacy, but also to include a check for undertreatment and for inappropriate medication. Material and methods Widely recognised tools to assess the medication of geriatric patients are the STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons’ Prescriptions)/START (Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment) criteria, the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) and lists with PIMs. For this study, the medication lists of 50 geriatric patients (level of care ≥3) in a nursing home were analysed in detail using these three instruments. The medication review of each patient was repeated within 6 months to record the acceptance of the interventions. Results Overall, the pharmacist pointed to a possible drug related problem in 28% of all prescribed medicines, equivalent to three possible drug related problems per patient. Over 50% of the interventions suggested by the pharmacist were accepted and kept until the following review. Conclusion The type and number of drug related problems was strongly dependent on the assessment tool. This should be taken into account when introducing an assessment tool into daily routine. It is also important to note that the number of identified problems neither corresponds to the clinical significance of the problem nor to the quality of the medication before the review was performed. To put it bluntly, the mere number of interventions should not be seen as the main indicator of pharmaceutical care. Instead, more weight should be put on the clinical significance of these interventions. References and/or Acknowledgements Gallagher P, Ryan C, Byrne S, et al. STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons’ Prescriptions) and START (Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment). Consensus Validation. Int J Clin Pharm Ther 2008;46:72–83 No conflict of interest.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Background Geriatric patients often suffer from multiple chronic diseases. Polypharmacy as well as age related physiological changes expose them to a high risk of drug related adverse events. Poor adherence and potentially inappropriate medicines (PIMs) are a further challenge for prescribers. Purpose When performing a medication review, it is important to not only check for overtreatment in order to reduce polypharmacy, but also to include a check for undertreatment and for inappropriate medication. Material and methods Widely recognised tools to assess the medication of geriatric patients are the STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons’ Prescriptions)/START (Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment) criteria, the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) and lists with PIMs. For this study, the medication lists of 50 geriatric patients (level of care ≥3) in a nursing home were analysed in detail using these three instruments. The medication review of each patient was repeated within 6 months to record the acceptance of the interventions. Results Overall, the pharmacist pointed to a possible drug related problem in 28% of all prescribed medicines, equivalent to three possible drug related problems per patient. Over 50% of the interventions suggested by the pharmacist were accepted and kept until the following review. Conclusion The type and number of drug related problems was strongly dependent on the assessment tool. This should be taken into account when introducing an assessment tool into daily routine. It is also important to note that the number of identified problems neither corresponds to the clinical significance of the problem nor to the quality of the medication before the review was performed. To put it bluntly, the mere number of interventions should not be seen as the main indicator of pharmaceutical care. Instead, more weight should be put on the clinical significance of these interventions. References and/or Acknowledgements Gallagher P, Ryan C, Byrne S, et al. STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons’ Prescriptions) and START (Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment). Consensus Validation. Int J Clin Pharm Ther 2008;46:72–83 No conflict of interest.

Key concepts: Polypharmacy, Medicine, Psychological intervention, Medical prescription, Pharmacist, Geriatrics, Older people, Beers Criteria

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
CP-002 Managing polypharmacy in geriatric patients – a comparison of different assessment tools used for medication reviews — Research Paper | ScholarLens