4.3 Article

Clinical relevance of potentially inappropriate medications and potential prescribing omissions according to explicit criteria-a validation study

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
卷 78, 期 8, 页码 1331-1339

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00228-022-03337-8

关键词

Clinical relevance; EU(7)-PIM list; Older people; Potentially inappropriate medications; Potential prescribing omissions; Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions (STOPP); Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START); Swedish set of criteria

资金

  1. University of Gothenburg
  2. Swedish Research Council [2013-02639]
  3. Swedish government [ALFGBG-716941]
  4. Swedish county councils [ALFGBG-716941]
  5. Vinnova [2013-02639] Funding Source: Vinnova
  6. Swedish Research Council [2013-02639] Funding Source: Swedish Research Council
  7. Forte [2013-02639] Funding Source: Forte

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the clinical relevance of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs), and finds that a fraction of them are clinically relevant. The study shows that the number of PIMs/PPOs and the number of drugs are associated with inadequate drug treatment.
Purpose To investigate the clinical relevance of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs), and to evaluate the association between PIMs/PPOs and inadequate drug treatment. Methods PIMs/PPOs, concordantly identified by two physicians applying the STOPP/START criteria, the EU(7)-PIM list, and a Swedish set in 302 consecutive older primary care patients, were assessed regarding clinical relevance for the specific patient. The physicians determined, in consensus, whether an action related to the medication was medically justified prior to the next regular consultation. If so, the drug treatment was categorised as inadequate, and if not, the treatment was considered adequate. Results In all, 259 (86%) patients had 1010 PIMs/PPOs, 150 (15%) of which, in 81 (27%) patients, were assessed as clinically relevant (kappa: 0.26). A total of 75 (50%) clinically relevant PIMs and PPOs were prioritised for medical action before the next regular consultation. Action-requiring clinically relevant PIMs most often concerned acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) for primary prevention (four out of 68 patients on ASA). The corresponding PPOs concerned beta-blockers in ischaemic heart disease (four out of 61 patients with this condition). When an overall medical perspective was applied, 164 (63%) out of 259 patients with PIMs/PPOs were assessed as having adequate treatment. In adjusted logistic regression, number of PIMs and/or PPOs and number of drugs were associated with inadequate drug treatment. Conclusion One in seven PIMs/PPOs may be clinically relevant, half of these not of priority for medical action. Cautious interpretation is warranted when PIMs/PPOs are used as outcome measures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据