‘Potentially inappropriate or specifically appropriate?’ Qualitative evaluation of general practitioners views on prescribing, polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people

Background: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is common in older people in primary care, as evidenced by a significant body of quantitative research. However, relatively few qualitative studies have investigated the phenomenon of PIP and its underlying processes from the perspective of general practitioners (GPs). The aim of this paper is to explore qualitatively, GP perspectives regarding prescribing and PIP in older primary care patients.

Method: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with GPs participating in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of an intervention to decrease PIP in older patients (≥70 years) in Ireland. Interviews were conducted with GP participants (both intervention and control) from the OPTI-SCRIPT cluster RCT as part of the trial process evaluation between January and July 2013. Interviews were conducted by one interviewer and audio recorded. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and a thematic analysis was conducted.

Results: Seventeen semi-structured interviews were conducted (13 male; 4 female). Three main, inter-related themes emerged (complex prescribing environment, paternalistic doctor-patient relationship, and relevance of PIP concept). Patient complexity (e.g. polypharmacy, multimorbidity), as well as prescriber complexity (e.g. multiple prescribers, poor communication, restricted autonomy) were all identified as factors contributing to a complex prescribing environment where PIP could occur, as was a paternalistic-doctor patient relationship. The concept of PIP was perceived to be of variable usefulness to GPs and the criteria to measure it may be at odds with the complex processes of prescribing for this patient population.

Conclusions: Several inter-related factors contributing to the occurrence of PIP were identified, some of which may be amenable to intervention. Improvement strategies focused on improved management of polypharmacy and multimorbidity, and communication across primary and secondary care could result in substantial improvements in PIP.

Troponin I and cardiovascular risk prediction in the general population: the BiomarCaRE consortium

AIMS: Our aims were to evaluate the distribution of troponin I concentrations in population cohorts across Europe, to characterize the association with cardiovascular outcomes, to determine the predictive value beyond the variables used in the ESC SCORE, to test a potentially clinically relevant cut-off value, and to evaluate the improved eligibility for statin therapy based on elevated troponin I concentrations retrospectively.

METHODS AND RESULTS: Based on the Biomarkers for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment in Europe (BiomarCaRE) project, we analysed individual level data from 10 prospective population-based studies including 74 738 participants. We investigated the value of adding troponin I levels to conventional risk factors for prediction of cardiovascular disease by calculating measures of discrimination (C-index) and net reclassification improvement (NRI). We further tested the clinical implication of statin therapy based on troponin concentration in 12 956 individuals free of cardiovascular disease in the JUPITER study. Troponin I remained an independent predictor with a hazard ratio of 1.37 for cardiovascular mortality, 1.23 for cardiovascular disease, and 1.24 for total mortality. The addition of troponin I information to a prognostic model for cardiovascular death constructed of ESC SCORE variables increased the C-index discrimination measure by 0.007 and yielded an NRI of 0.048, whereas the addition to prognostic models for cardiovascular disease and total mortality led to lesser C-index discrimination and NRI increment. In individuals above 6 ng/L of troponin I, a concentration near the upper quintile in BiomarCaRE (5.9 ng/L) and JUPITER (5.8 ng/L), rosuvastatin therapy resulted in higher absolute risk reduction compared with individuals <6 ng/L of troponin I, whereas the relative risk reduction was similar.

CONCLUSION: In individuals free of cardiovascular disease, the addition of troponin I to variables of established risk score improves prediction of cardiovascular death and cardiovascular disease.