The development of the PROMPT (PRescribing Optimally in Middle-aged People’s Treatments) criteria

BACKGROUND: Whilst multimorbidity is more prevalent with increasing age, approximately 30% of middle-aged adults (45-64 years) are also affected. Several prescribing criteria have been developed to optimise medication use in older people (≥65 years) with little focus on potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in middle-aged adults. We have developed a set of explicit prescribing criteria called PROMPT (PRescribing Optimally in Middle-aged People's Treatments) which may be applied to prescribing datasets to determine the prevalence of PIP in this age-group.

METHODS: A literature search was conducted to identify published prescribing criteria for all age groups, with the Project Steering Group (convened for this study) adding further criteria for consideration, all of which were reviewed for relevance to middle-aged adults. These criteria underwent a two-round Delphi process, using an expert panel consisting of general practitioners, pharmacists and clinical pharmacologists from the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. Using web-based questionnaires, 17 panellists were asked to indicate their level of agreement with each criterion via a 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree) to assess the applicability to middle-aged adults in the absence of clinical information. Criteria were accepted/rejected/revised dependent on the panel's level of agreement using the median response/interquartile range and additional comments.

RESULTS: Thirty-four criteria were rated in the first round of this exercise and consensus was achieved on 17 criteria which were accepted into the PROMPT criteria. Consensus was not reached on the remaining 17, and six criteria were removed following a review of the additional comments. The second round of this exercise focused on the remaining 11 criteria, some of which were revised following the first exercise. Five criteria were accepted from the second round, providing a final list of 22 criteria [gastro-intestinal system (n = 3), cardiovascular system (n = 4), respiratory system (n = 4), central nervous system (n = 6), infections (n = 1), endocrine system (n = 1), musculoskeletal system (n = 2), duplicates (n = 1)].

CONCLUSIONS: PROMPT is the first set of prescribing criteria developed for use in middle-aged adults. The utility of these criteria will be tested in future studies using prescribing datasets.

Any versus long-term prescribing of high risk medications in older people using 2012 Beers Criteria: results from three cross-sectional samples of primary care records for 2003/4, 2007/8 and 2011/12

Background: High risk medications are commonly prescribed to older US patients. Currently, less is known about high risk medication prescribing in other Western Countries, including the UK. We measured trends and correlates of high risk medication prescribing in a subset of the older UK population (community/institutionalized) to inform harm minimization efforts. Methods: Three cross-sectional samples from primary care electronic clinical records (UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, CPRD) in fiscal years 2003/04, 2007/08 and 2011/12 were taken. This yielded a sample of 13,900 people aged 65 years or over from 504 UK general practices. High risk medications were defined by 2012 Beers Criteria adapted for the UK. Using descriptive statistical methods and regression modelling, prevalence of ‘any’ (drugs prescribed at least once per year) and ‘long-term’ (drugs prescribed all quarters of year) high risk medication prescribing and correlates were determined. Results: While polypharmacy rates have risen sharply, high risk medication prevalence has remained stable across a decade. A third of older (65+) people are exposed to high risk medications, but only half of the total prevalence was long-term (any = 38.4 % [95 % CI: 36.3, 40.5]; long-term = 17.4 % [15.9, 19.9] in 2011/12). Long-term but not any high risk medication exposure was associated with older ages (85 years or over). Women and people with higher polypharmacy burden were at greater risk of exposure; lower socio-economic status was not associated. Ten drugs/drug classes accounted for most of high risk medication prescribing in 2011/12. Conclusions: High risk medication prescribing has not increased over time against a background of increasing polypharmacy in the UK. Half of patients receiving high risk medications do so for less than a year. Reducing or optimising the use of a limited number of drugs could dramatically reduce high risk medications in older people. Further research is needed to investigate why the oldest old and women are at greater risk. Interventions to reduce high risk medications may need to target shorter and long-term use separately.

Potentially inappropriate prescribing in two populations with differing socio-economic profiles: a cross-sectional database study using the PROMPT criteria

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to establish the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in middle-aged adults (45-64 years) in two populations with differing socio-economic profiles, and to investigate factors associated with PIP, using the PROMPT (PRescribing Optimally in Middle-aged People's Treatments) criteria.METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted using 2012 data from the Enhanced Prescribing Database (EPD), covering the full population in Northern Ireland and the Health Services Executive Primary Care Reimbursement Service (HSE-PCRS) database, covering the most socio-economically deprived third of the population in this age group in the Republic of Ireland. The prevalence for each PROMPT criterion and overall prevalence of PIP were calculated. Logistic regression was used to investigate the association between PIP and gender, age group and polypharmacy.RESULTS: This study included 441,925 patients from the EPD and 309,748 patients from the HSE-PCRS database. Polypharmacy was common in both datasets (46.7 % in the HSE-PCRS and 20.3 % in the EPD). The prevalence of PIP was 42.9 % (95%CI 42.7, 43.1) in the HSE-PCRS and 21.1 % (95%CI 21.0, 21.2) in the EPD. Age group, female gender and polypharmacy were significantly associated with PIP in both populations (p < 0.05) and polypharmacy had the strongest association.CONCLUSIONS: PIP is common amongst middle-aged people with the risk of PIP increasing with polypharmacy. Differences in the prevalence of polypharmacy and PIP between the two populations may relate to heterogeneity in healthcare services and different socio-economic profiles, with higher rates of multimorbidity and associated polypharmacy in more deprived groups.

Potentially inappropriate prescribing among people with dementia in primary care: a retrospective cross-sectional study using the Enhanced Prescribing Database

Background: Little is known about prescribing appropriateness for community-dwelling people with dementia (PWD).
Objective To estimate potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) prevalence among PWD in primary care in Northern Ireland, and to investigate associations between PIP and polypharmacy, age and gender.

Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted, using data from the Enhanced Prescribing Database. Patients were eligible if a medicine indicated for dementia management was dispensed to them during 01/01/2013 – 31/12/2013. Polypharmacy was indicated by use of ≥4 repeat medications from different drug groups. A subset of the Screening Tool of Older Persons Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria, comprising 36 indicators, was applied to the dataset. Overall prevalence of PIP and the prevalence per each STOPP criterion was calculated as a proportion of all eligible persons in the dataset. Logistic regression was used to investigate associations between PIP, polypharmacy, age and gender.

Results: The study population comprised 6826 patients. Polypharmacy was observed in 81.5% (n=5564) of patients. PIP prevalence during the study period was 64.4% (95% CI 63.2 – 65.5; n=4393). The most common instance of PIP was the use of anticholinergic/antimuscarinic medications (n=1718; 25.2%; 95% CI 24.2 – 26.2). In multivariable analyses, both polypharmacy and gender (being female) were associated with PIP, with odds ratios of 7.6 (95% CI 6.6 – 8.7) and 1.3 (95% CI 1.2 – 1.4) respectively. No association was observed between PIP and age, after adjustments for gender and polypharmacy.

Conclusion: This study identified a high prevalence of PIP in community-dwelling PWD. Future interventions may need to focus on certain therapeutic categories and polypharmacy.

Gerodontology teaching amongst European dental schools – A European College of Gerodontology survey.

Introduction: In 2009, the European College of Gerodontology (ECG) published the Gerodontology undergraduate teaching guidelines. Seven years later it conducted a survey to explore the current status of Gerodontology teaching amongst the European dental schools.
Methods: The ECG Education Committee developed an electronic questionnaire that was emailed to the Deans or other contact persons in 185 dental schools in 40 European countries. The questionnaire recorded the prevalence, contents and methodology of Gerodontology education. Two weeks later a reminder was sent to non-respondents.
Results: The first wave of responses included 70 dental schools from 28 European countries. Gerodontology was included in the undergraduate curricula of 77% of the respondents and was compulsory in 61% of them. The course was usually offered in senior students and was interdisciplinary; the educators included dentists, physicians, nurses and other care providers. Lecturing was the most common educational technique (75%), and the most common topics included medical problems in old age, pharmacology and polypharmacy, the association between general and oral health, nutritional and chewing problems, xerostomia and prosthodontic management. Clinical training was usually offered within the dental school clinics (50%) and less often in remote locations (nursing homes, geriatric hospitals, day centers).
Key Conclusions: An increasing number of European dental schools teach Gerodontology at the undergraduate curriculum. The study is still ongoing, but a "worst case scenario" has to be born in mind, where dental schools, who failed to participate in the survey, may not be teaching in Gerodontology.

Statin withdrawal in people with dementia

Background: There are approximately 24 million people worldwide with dementia; this is likely to increase to 81 million by 2040. Dementia is a progressive condition, and usually leads to death eight to ten years after first symptoms. End-of-life care should emphasise treatments that optimise quality of life and physicians should minimise unnecessary or non-beneficial interventions. Statins are 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors; they have become the cornerstone of pharmacotherapy for the management of hypercholesterolaemia but their ability to provide benefit is unclear in the last weeks or months of life. Withdrawal of statins may improve quality of life in people with advanced dementia, as they will not be subjected to unnecessary polypharmacy or side effects. However, they may help to prevent further vascular events in people of advanced age who are at high risk of such events.

Objectives: To evaluate the effects of withdrawal or continuation of statins in people with dementia on: cognitive outcomes, adverse events, behavioural and functional outcomes, mortality, quality of life, vascular morbidity, and healthcare costs.

Search methods: We searched ALOIS (medicine.ox.ac.uk/alois/), the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group Specialised Register on 11 February 2016. We also ran additional searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Clinical.Trials.gov and the WHO Portal/ICTRP on 11 February 2016, to ensure that the searches were as comprehensive and as up-to-date as possible.

Selection criteria: We included all randomised, controlled clinical trials with either a placebo or 'no treatment' control group. We applied no language restrictions.

Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed whether potentially relevant studies met the inclusion criteria, using standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We found no studies suitable for inclusion therefore analysed no data.

Main results: The search strategy identified 28 unique references, all of which were excluded.

Authors' conclusions: We found no evidence to enable us to make an informed decision about statin withdrawal in dementia. Randomised controlled studies need to be conducted to assess cognitive and other effects of statins in participants with dementia, especially when the disease is advanced.