The Effect of Pharmacist-Initiated Deprescribing Interventions in Older People: A Narrative Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Q2 Medicine
Michelle Nguyen, Manju T Beier, Diana N Louden, Darla Spears, Shelly L Gray
{"title":"The Effect of Pharmacist-Initiated Deprescribing Interventions in Older People: A Narrative Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Michelle Nguyen, Manju T Beier, Diana N Louden, Darla Spears, Shelly L Gray","doi":"10.4140/TCP.n.2023.506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b> Polypharmacy is common among older people and may be associated with adverse drug events (ADEs) and poor health outcomes. Pharmacists are well-positioned to reduce polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications. <b>Objective</b> The objective of this narrative review was to summarize the results from randomized-controlled trials that evaluated pharmacist-led interventions with the goal or effect to deprescribe medications in older individuals. <b>Data Sources</b> We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL Complete, APA PsycInfo, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. <b>Data Synthesis</b> Of the 25 studies included, the interventions were conducted in nursing facilities (n = 8), outpatient/community dwellings (n = 8), or community pharmacies (n = 9). Interventions were categorized as comprehensive medication reviews (n = 10), comprehensive medication reviews with pharmacist follow-up (n = 11), and educational interventions provided to patients and/or providers (n = 4). Pharmacist-led interventions had a beneficial effect on 22 out of 32 total medication-related outcomes (eg, number of medications, potentially inappropriate medications, or discontinuation). Most (n = 18) studies reported no evidence of an effect for other outcomes such as health care use, mortality, patient-centered outcomes (falls, cognition, function, quality of life), and ADEs. <b>Discussion</b> Interventions led to improvement in 69% of the medication-related outcomes examined across study settings. Five studies measured ADEs with none accounting for adverse drug-withdrawal events. Large well-designed studies that are powered to find an effect on patient-centered outcomes are needed. <b>Conclusion</b> Pharmacist-led interventions had a significant beneficial effect on medication-related outcomes. There was little evidence of benefit on other outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":41635,"journal":{"name":"Senior Care Pharmacist","volume":"38 12","pages":"506-523"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Senior Care Pharmacist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4140/TCP.n.2023.506","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Polypharmacy is common among older people and may be associated with adverse drug events (ADEs) and poor health outcomes. Pharmacists are well-positioned to reduce polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications. Objective The objective of this narrative review was to summarize the results from randomized-controlled trials that evaluated pharmacist-led interventions with the goal or effect to deprescribe medications in older individuals. Data Sources We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL Complete, APA PsycInfo, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Data Synthesis Of the 25 studies included, the interventions were conducted in nursing facilities (n = 8), outpatient/community dwellings (n = 8), or community pharmacies (n = 9). Interventions were categorized as comprehensive medication reviews (n = 10), comprehensive medication reviews with pharmacist follow-up (n = 11), and educational interventions provided to patients and/or providers (n = 4). Pharmacist-led interventions had a beneficial effect on 22 out of 32 total medication-related outcomes (eg, number of medications, potentially inappropriate medications, or discontinuation). Most (n = 18) studies reported no evidence of an effect for other outcomes such as health care use, mortality, patient-centered outcomes (falls, cognition, function, quality of life), and ADEs. Discussion Interventions led to improvement in 69% of the medication-related outcomes examined across study settings. Five studies measured ADEs with none accounting for adverse drug-withdrawal events. Large well-designed studies that are powered to find an effect on patient-centered outcomes are needed. Conclusion Pharmacist-led interventions had a significant beneficial effect on medication-related outcomes. There was little evidence of benefit on other outcomes.

药师主动处方干预对老年人的影响:一项随机对照试验的述评。
背景:多种用药在老年人中很常见,可能与药物不良事件(ADEs)和不良健康结局有关。药剂师可以很好地减少多药和可能不适当的药物。这篇叙述性综述的目的是总结随机对照试验的结果,这些试验评估了药师主导的干预措施的目标或效果,以减少老年人的药物处方。我们检索了Medline, Embase, CINAHL Complete, APA PsycInfo, Web of Science Core Collection和Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials。纳入的25项研究中,干预措施在护理机构(n = 8)、门诊/社区住宅(n = 8)或社区药房(n = 9)进行。干预措施分为综合药物评价(n = 10)、综合药物评价与药剂师随访(n = 11)、综合药物评价与药剂师随访(n = 11)。向患者和/或提供者提供教育干预(n = 4)。药师主导的干预对32项药物相关结果中的22项(例如,药物数量、可能不适当的药物或停药)有有益影响。大多数(n = 18)研究报告没有证据表明对其他结果有影响,如医疗保健使用、死亡率、以患者为中心的结果(跌倒、认知、功能、生活质量)和ADEs。在所有研究环境中,干预措施改善了69%的药物相关结果。五项研究测量了ade,但没有考虑到不良药物戒断事件。需要设计良好的大型研究来发现对以患者为中心的结果的影响。结论药师主导的干预措施对药物相关结局有显著的有益影响。几乎没有证据表明它对其他结果有好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Senior Care Pharmacist
Senior Care Pharmacist PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
160
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信